Search - ”资源化利用" resource

Imperial Oil Resources Limited v. Canada (Attorney General), 2016 FCA 139-- summary under Subsection 171(1) Summary Under Tax Topics- Income Tax Act- Section 171- Subsection 171(1) Tax Court has no jurisdiction to hear an appeal on the computation of refund interest The second taxpayer (“IOVRL”), like the first, took the position that remission payments should be treated in the same manner for purposes of entitling the taxpayer to refund interest under s. 164(3) as instalment payments. ... As explained by Rip J….in McMillen …, the amount of a refund resulting from an overpayment, although often set out on the notice of assessment, is not an assessed amount (McMillen, para. 47). ...

ConocoPhillips Canada Resources Corp., 2017 FCA 243-- summary under Specific v. ... The principle was described in James Richardson & Sons, Ltd. v. Minister of National Revenue, [1984] 1 S.C.R. 614, 84 D.T.C. 6325 at 6329, where the Court referred to the English decision of Pretty v. ...

In reversing the finding of Boswell J below that the Minister indeed had such discretion, Woods JA stated (at paras 41, 42): The Minister is prohibited by the statute from granting an extension unless the conditions specified in subsection 166.1(7) have been satisfied. … … [T]he Minister may not extend the time under this provision unless the application has been made within one year. ... Woods JA further found (at paras 47, 48 and 52): The relief that ConocoPhillips seeks is to use the general waiver provision in subsection 220(2.1) … in order to engage the objection process without having to comply with its statutory conditions. ... The general waiver provision cannot be applied in this manner to override a more specific provision. …... ...

…[A]pproximately 70% of the Appellant’s revenues for the relevant period were expended on fundraising. … …[F]undraising itself cannot become a raison d'être for a charity. …[T]he high level of fundraising activities undertaken … can reasonably be regarded as having become an end in itself. ... This requirement is necessarily breached if resources of the organization are instead devoted to the provision of undue benefits. ...

After confirming the decision of the Minister to revoke the registration of the Foundation under s. 168(1)(e) on the grounds of essentially no records substantiating the consulting fees (and in finding that the decision of the Minster to revoke under s. 168(1)(b) on the grounds that the consulting fees had not been established to satisfy the requirement for the Foundation to devote all of its resources either to charitable activities or as gifts to qualified donees, Woods JA stated (at paras. 53, 57): … The Appeals Directorate noted that most of the funds received and disbursed by the Foundation were to registered charities in which …[Mr. ... In this case, the question is not whether the Minister ignored gifts to qualified donees, but whether the Foundation used some of its resources to pay [Mr. ...

Burke was entitled to none of the benefits, she stated (at paras. 116-117): This, as well as other factors identified … at paragraph 142 of Vavilov such as concerns about delay, fairness to the parties, costs to the parties and the efficient use of public resources, support a finding that the matter should not be remitted to the Appeal Division for redetermination. … Declining to remit a matter to the administrative decision maker may also be appropriate where it becomes evident to the Court that a particular outcome is inevitable …. ...

In confirming the decision of the Minister to revoke the registration of the Foundation under s. 168(1)(e) (and before going on to find that the decision of the Minster to revoke under s. 168(1)(b) on the grounds that the consulting fees had not been established to satisfy the requirement for the Foundation to devote all of its resources either to charitable activities or as gifts to qualified donees), Woods JA stated (at paras 37-39, and 43): Prescient Foundation … pointed out that revocation should be limited to instances of “material or repeated non-compliance” …. [T]he Foundation failed to provide any records that demonstrated what consulting services …[Mr.O] provided for the fees he received. … [A] bald reference to consulting projects in an invoice that cannot be corroborated with other evidence does not satisfy the records requirement of the Act. It was reasonable for the Minister to conclude that the failure to maintain supporting documentation to enable verification of the consulting fees paid to … [Mr.O] justified the revocation of the registration, especially since … the Foundation showed no willingness to comply in the future…. … This Court has held that if a charity’s books and records are insufficient for the CRA to assess whether the charity is in compliance with its obligations under the Act, this may be sufficient ground upon which to revoke the charity’s charitable status …. ...

Canada, 2016 FCA 304-- summary under Investment Contract Summary Under Tax Topics- Income Tax Act- Section 12- Subsection 12(11)- Investment Contract pointless to determine whether an instrument is debt for purposes of whole Act The Federal Court of Appeal dismissed the Barejo appeal – but on the grounds that the Rule 58 question posed to the Tax Court was whether the “notes” in question were debts for purposes of the Act rather than for purposes of s. 94.1 thereof. ... “that endeavouring to dispose [of] the appeals on the merits would serve no useful purpose and give rise to an improper use of judicial resources.” ...

., 2018 FCA 166-- summary under Subsection 160(1) Summary Under Tax Topics- Income Tax Act- Section 160- Subsection 160(1) stock dividend followed by redemption of the stock dividend shares effected in combination a transfer of property for no consideration Income account treatment of the profits realized by a condo-project limited partnership was avoided through the corporate partners (the Partnercos) of the partnership paying safe income dividends (out of the realized but unallocated condo profits) to their respective Holdco shareholders through the payment of stock dividends of preferred shares followed by a redemption of those preferred shares – in turn, followed by a sale by the Holdcos of the Partnercos to a public company with substantial resource pools (Nuinsco). ... After first finding that the allocation of the income to Nuinsco rather than to the Partnercos represented an abusive avoidance for purposes of s. 245(4) of ss. 96(1)(f) and 103(1), Woods JA went on to find that s. 160 would have applied to the transfer of property of the Partnercos to the Holdcos effected through the preferred share stock dividends and redemptions but for the fact that the associated tax liability did not arise until the income was allocated to an arm's length person (Nuinsco), stating (at paras. 112, 115): The stock dividends and the redemption together resulted in a transfer of cash “indirectly … by any means whatever” from Partnerco to Holdco without consideration. … Although the Algoa Trust decision deals with a cash dividend, the combination in this case of stock dividends followed by a redemption has the same effect and similarly results in a transfer of property without consideration. ...

CRA sought to have the Tax Court make a determination as to the validity of Canadian development expense claims by a significant number of different taxpayers respecting their purchase of rights from a resource company. ... Absent an error of law or principle or palpable and overriding error, this Court cannot interfere with its exercise of discretion. … Section 174 does not require the Tax Court to make any type of order. ... The Tax Court was entitled to take into account issues of efficiency and procedural fairness. … [T]his Court must defer to such a factually suffused, discretionary finding. … ...