Search - ”资源化利用" resource

Imperial Oil Resources Limited v. Canada (Attorney General), 2008 DTC 6657, 2008 FC 1037-- summary under Payment & Receipt Summary Under Tax Topics- General Concepts- Payment & Receipt embedded royalty reduction was not an amount received The Alberta government granted a reduction in the royalties the taxpayer otherwise would have been required to pay to Alberta on condition that the taxpayer invest in an expansion of the Syncrude project. ...

ConocoPhillips Canada Resources Corp. v. Canada (National Revenue), 2016 DTC 5016 [at 6588], 2016 FC 98, 2017 FCA 243 rev'd-- summary under Subsection 220(2.1) Summary Under Tax Topics- Income Tax Act- Section 220- Subsection 220(2.1) discretion under s. 220(2.1) to waive filing a Notice of Objection The taxpayer (“ConocoPhillips”) claimed that it did not learn about a reassessment of its 2000 taxation year (which nullified a previous reassessment for the 2000 year which it had validly objected to) allegedly mailed on November 7, 2008 until April 14, 2010. ... The fact a notice of objection may be served should not prevent subsection 220(2.1) from applying to notices of objection. … [T]he purpose of subsection 220(2.1) is to blunt the unfairness that sometimes arises by strict application of the filing and notice requirements in the ITA. The Minister’s discretionary power under subsection 220(2.1) should not be unduly limited or fettered through an unduly narrow interpretation which the Minister unreasonably adopted and applied in this case. … Respecting an argument of the Minister (at paras. 57-58) that “subsection 165(3) explicitly requires a notice of objection before there can be a reassessment” and that “the discretion to waive a notice of objection under subsection 220(2.1) would be nonsensical due to lack of a remedy,” he stated (at paras. 58-59): Subsection 165(3) does not state that without a notice of objection, the Minister shall not or cannot reconsider an assessment, and there are situations under the ITA where the Minister is explicitly given the power to reassess without a notice of objection. … Moreover, subsection 220(2.1) specifically enables the Minister to request a document that has been waived. ...

ConocoPhillips Canada Resources Corp. v. Canada (National Revenue), 2016 DTC 5016 [at 6588], 2016 FC 98, 2017 FCA 243 rev'd-- summary under Subsection 165(1) Summary Under Tax Topics- Income Tax Act- Section 165- Subsection 165(1) Minister can consider reassessment without Notice of Objection Boswell J has found that s. 220(2.1) accords the Minister the discretion to waive the requirement to file a Notice of Objection, so that it was improper for CRA to peremptorily reject (on the grounds that it had no power to do so) a ConocoPhillips request that CRA waive a requirement for it to object to a reassessment which ConocoPhillips found out about well after the deadline for getting an extension to object to it. Respecting an argument of the Minister (at paras. 57-58) that “subsection 165(3) explicitly requires a notice of objection before there can be a reassessment” and that “the discretion to waive a notice of objection under subsection 220(2.1) would be nonsensical due to lack of a remedy,” he stated (at paras. 58-59): Subsection 165(3) does not state that without a notice of objection, the Minister shall not or cannot reconsider an assessment, and there are situations under the ITA where the Minister is explicitly given the power to reassess without a notice of objection. … Moreover, subsection 220(2.1) specifically enables the Minister to request a document that has been waived. ...

Canada (Attorney General), 2022 FC 198-- summary under Subsection 85(7.1) Summary Under Tax Topics- Income Tax Act- Section 85- Subsection 85(7.1) taxpayer worse off for filing s. 97(2) elections on a timely basis rather than late In January 2015, the taxpayer transferred resource properties to a limited partnership that was wholly-owned by it, directly and indirectly. ... In dismissing the taxpayer’s application for judicial review, Aylen J stated (at paras. 41-42, 53): I am satisfied that the Applicant’s “explanation” was so devoid of particulars that it did not amount to an explanation at all. … The Applicant … failed to explain in any meaningful way why it would be just and equitable for the Minister [grant the request]. … I am not satisfied that the Applicant has demonstrated any error by the Minister’s delegate in his finding that the amendment requests constituted an attempt to circumvent the successor rule stipulated in section 66.7 …. ...

Canada (Attorney General), 2022 FC 198-- summary under Subsection 96(5.1) Summary Under Tax Topics- Income Tax Act- Section 96- Subsection 96(5.1) taxpayer failed to provide any explanation to CRA as to why it was not engaged in retroactive tax planning In January 2015, the taxpayer transferred resource properties to a limited partnership that was wholly-owned by it, directly and indirectly. ... In dismissing the taxpayer’s application for judicial review, Aylen J stated (at paras. 41-42): I am satisfied that the Applicant’s “explanation” was so devoid of particulars that it did not amount to an explanation at all. … The Applicant … failed to explain in any meaningful way why it would be just and equitable for the Minister to do so. … I find that it would have been reasonable, on this basis alone, for the Minister to have rejected the amendment requests, without even considering the various other factors detailed in the information circulars [IC 76-19R3 and IC 07-01]. ... As such, I am not satisfied that the Applicant has demonstrated any error by the Minister’s delegate in his finding that the amendment requests constituted an attempt to circumvent the successor rule stipulated in section 66.7 …. ...

The Minister denied the companies’ applications for relief from interest and penalties accrued during their 2014 through 2020 taxation years, made on the basis of “extraordinary circumstances leading to … financial hardship.” ... Otherwise, relief was denied largely on the basis that “the director remained responsible to take the necessary measures … to ensure that all obligations [were] met when required” and failed to do so, and also relief was denied under the financial hardship ground as the appropriate financial arrangements to pay the arrears including borrowing and restructuring finances to retire the debt had been made. ... Challis’ actions did not immediately end with his firing (the companies simply did not have the financial resources to make the necessary payments after such firing) and CRA’s finding to the contrary was unreasonable. ...