Search - 三河市 市委书记 现任

S & D International Group Inc. v. A.G. of Canada, 2011 DTC 5072 [at at 5771], 2011 ABQB 230-- summary under Rectification & Rescission Summary Under Tax Topics- General Concepts- Rectification & Rescission transactions would have been structured differently without mistake The corporate applicant (S & D) carried on a real estate trading and development business. It had three directors, whose wives, the individual applicants, each held 25% of S & D's shares. ... Accordingly, the shares of the wives in S & D were purchased for cancellation in consideration for the transfer of lands of S & D to a corporation owned equally by the wives. ...

The place would be treated as ‘at the disposal’ of the enterprise when the enterprise has right to use the said place and has control thereupon. … [The] Buddh International Circuit is a fixed place. From this circuit different races, including the Grand Prix is [sic] conducted, which is undoubtedly an economic/business activity. … Respecting whether the circuit was a fixed place of business of FOWC, he referenced the control rights accorded to FOWC under the Service Agreement, and stated (also at para. 67): … The … arrangement clearly demonstrates that the entire event is taken over and controlled by FOWC and its affiliates. ... All these are controlled by FOWC and its affiliates. … Omnipresence of FOWC and its stamp over the event is loud, clear and firm. … [A] commonsense and plain thinking of the entire situation would lead to the conclusion that FOWC had made their earning in India through the said track over which they had complete control during the period of [the] race. ...

Halsall & Ors v Champion Consulting Ltd & Ors, [2017] EWHC 1079 (QBD)-- summary under Negligence, Fiduciary Duty and Fault Summary Under Tax Topics- General Concepts- Negligence, Fiduciary Duty and Fault knowledge that advice – that investing in a tax shelter was a “no brainer”- was negligent, accrued when HMRC started investigating The claimants, who were non-tax solicitors, claimed that they had been negligently induced by the defendant accounting firm (“Champion LLP”) and an associated corporation (“Champion Consulting”) to invest in two tax schemes referred to as the "charity shell" and "Scion" film schemes. ... The fact that some of the companies succeeded and that some of the schemes went unchallenged by the Revenue is in my view irrelevant to the question of whether the reasonably competent tax adviser would have given an unconditional assurance that the charity shell scheme would work effectively. … [T]he failure … lay in not explaining that the valuation was pivotal to the success of the scheme and how this wide range of companies could all be valued at four times the initial subscription and this failure amounted to a breach of duty. ... With respect to the Scion film schemes, Moulder J found (at paras. 318, 319 and 335): … [I]t seems to me that the defendant did not advise that the claimant could lose more than their initial contribution. … The evidence is clear that the defendants did not point out the risk of the additional liability arising out of the outstanding loan and exposure to a tax charge in the event of the loan being written off. … [I]n my view the advice of Ms Molloy [an accountant and chartered tax advisor] that the prospects of success of the film scheme were 75% was outside the range open to her and amounted to a breach of duty being advice such as no reasonably well-informed and competent member of that profession could have given. ...

Wiltonpark Ltd & Ors v Revenue & Customs Commissioners, [2016] EWCA Civ 1294-- summary under Paragraph (a) Summary Under Tax Topics- Excise Tax Act- Section 123- Subsection 123(1)- Financial Service- Paragraph (a) fee charged by club for encashing vouchers was in economic reality for access to club The self-employed lap dancers at the appellants’ clubs often would accept vouchers from customers, who had run out of cash, in exchange for their services. ... In accepting the HMRC’s position that the vouchers were consideration for taxable supplies of club facilities provided by the appellants to the dancers, Richards LJ stated (at paras 42, 48 and 50): …[T]he critical point in my judgment is whether it is right to treat, as part of the services supplied in return for the commission payable on encashment of vouchers, the provision of the club's facilities to the dancers to enable them to obtain income from non-cash customers. … … [A] commission of 20% for the encashment of a voucher, even with the benefits of inclusion in the scheme, is on the face of it very high, particularly as the appellants ran, as they knew, a very low credit risk. … [T]he UT's analysis that the provision of the club's facilities forms part of the consideration for the commission on encashment of the vouchers is a legitimate interpretation of the constituent parts of the services supplied by the appellants in return for the commission. ...