Search - まっすぐに蹴る ネタバレ

Thereafter interest would be an even $5,000 per annum at 10% [1] *. The amount of $7,207.98 written off in 1968 had been set up as an asset and income tax paid on same in 1967 as it was not until 1968 that it was considered to be a bad debt. ...

In cross-examination, he said that to him this site represented “... a possible opportunity for a modest-sized site”. ...

In Sutton Lumber & Trading Co, Ltd v MNR, [1953] 2 S.C.R. 77; [1953] CTC 237; 53 DTC 1158 Locke, J said at page 83 [244, 1161]: The question to be decided is not as to what business or trade the company might have carried on under its memorandum, but rather what was in truth the business it did engage in.... ...

The only case which I have been able to find in which this section was discussed at all was in the Tax Appeal Board judgment in the case of Renown Steel & Services Limited v MNR, [1969] Tax ABC 678, which held that since subsection 39(6) is an exempting provision it must be strictly construed and as on the facts of the case the controller held the shares as a guarantor and not as a maker of a loan, he did not come within the provisions of subparagraph 39(6)(b)(i) so that the companies were held to be associated. ...

N 0 witnesses were called by either party and no explanation was given as to the discrepancy of $13,350 between the amount of the accounts ■ collected by Mrs. ...

Again, in concluding, he stated at page 212: On the whole I am of the opinion that. when, as a result of an appeal, the judicial authority set up has an assessment referred to it, the ministerial authority no longer has jurisdiction in the * matter and can no longer act until the court has passed judgment between the parties concerned. ...

On the other hand, that same Interpretation Bulletin considers any such payment as a " non-taxable capital receipt when the payment is a reimbursement of part or all of the tenant's capital cost of leasehold improvements". ...

Counsel for the Minister was frank to concede that the transactions between Companies and Paper were real and did not constitute a “sham” within the definition of that word in Snook v London & West Riding Investments, Ltd, [1967] 1 All ER 519 where Lord Diplock said at 528:... it is, I think, necessary to consider what, if any, legal concept is involved in the use of this popular and pejorative word. ...

In The Queen v Ken & Ray’s Collins Bay Supermarket Limited, [1975] CTC 504; 75 DTC 5346, Kerr, J decided that a somewhat similar management bonuses arrangement was contingent on the necessary funds being available. ...

As I see it, the payment toward the mortgage can only be an allowance for maintenance of those for whom maintenance was intended under the agreements — that is, the defendant at least initially, and any children living at home after July 1982 pending completion of their education. ...