Search - まっすぐに蹴る ネタバレ

Canada, 2016 FCA 299-- summary under Section 8.1 Summary Under Tax Topics- Statutory Interpretation- Interpretation Act- Section 8.1 Tax Court can review validity of contract in reviewing assessment Before indicating that it was unnecessary to pass on whether it was beyond the competence of the Tax Court to declare that options were invalid under Quebec law, Noël CJ stated (at para. 42, TaxInterpretations translation): [T]he role of the TCC, when confronted with an argument based on nullity in the context of an appeal under the ITA, cannot be assimilated to that of a Superior Court which has the power to “declare” a contract to be a nullity for all purposes pursuant to section 33, 35 and 142 of the Code of Civil Procedure … (see in comparison Markou v. ...

Green, 2017 FCA 107-- summary under Paragraph 111(1)(e) Summary Under Tax Topics- Income Tax Act- Section 111- Subsection 111(1)- Paragraph 111(1)(e) upper-tier LP not required to compute income and therefore not subject to s. 111(1)(e) CRA considered that business losses incurred by lower tier partnerships (the PSLPs) were deemed to be limited partnership losses of an upper-tier LP (MLP) – which meant that they were effectively trapped in MLP given that s. 111 (and, thus, the ability to deduct limited partnership losses under s. 111(1)(e)) was only available to a taxpayer and not to a partnership such as MLP. ...

. … Seeking “a sensible, practical and common sense result” is quite different from dispassionately and objectively examining the text, context and purpose of the legislation in issue; the latter turns on the nature of the legislation while the former depends on the nature of the judge. ...

When two or more words that are capable of analogous meaning are coupled together they take their colour from each other, the more general being restricted to a sense analogous to the less general …. ...

Canada, 2020 FCA 27-- summary under Subsection 171(2) Summary Under Tax Topics- Income Tax Act- Section 171- Subsection 171(2) an appeal can be bifurcated under s. 171(2) In reversing a decision of the Tax Court judge that s. 171(2) could not be applied to the appeal of the two taxpayers, Nadon J.A. stated (at paras. 2-3): [T]he provision clearly allowed the judge, if he was so inclined in the exercise of his discretion, to give effect to the parties’ request to bifurcate the issues, as per their letter to the Tax Court …. ...

Furthermore, CRA had subsequently reassessed the years in issue and, under ss. 152(8) and 169, such “reassessments [were] valid and binding until set aside by the Tax Court” – so that it was not relevant that, prior to the proposal letter and such reassessments, the taxpayer had requested an internal review of the Minister’s decision not to admit most of the years in question to the voluntary disclosure program. ...

Gleason JA did not consider that doctrine to be applicable, but found that even if the doctrine did apply, it did not work in the taxpayer’s favour, stating (at para. 27): [B]oth common sense and the expert evidence establish that the reason for administration of dental anesthetics- including those containing epinephrine- is pain control …. ...

As a technical matter, s. 112(3.1) did not apply to deny any portion of this capital loss because the NSULC paid all its dividends on a separate class of preferred shares that it had issued as a stock dividend – rather than on the common shares on which the LP had realized the loss. ...

HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN, 2021 FCA 17-- summary under Effective Date Summary Under Tax Topics- General Concepts- Effective Date price adjustment clause eliminated any possible value discrepancy between the FMV of the transferred property and the consideration therefor Before finding that s. 160 did not apply to a s. 55(3)(a) spin-off transaction in which each component transaction entailed a value-for-value exchange including the issuance and redemption of preferred shares with a price adjustment clause, Noël CJ noted, in passing, at para. 50: …160(1)(e)(i) … provides that the consideration is inadequate when the fair market value of the property transferred exceeds the fair market value of the consideration given at the time of the transfer (see Birchcliff Energy Ltd. v. ...

He stated that there indeed was consideration going the other way in the form of “Newco in turn … surrender[ing] the shares which had a corresponding $30 million value in its hands” (para. 69). ...