Search - 侵犯公民个人信息罪 交易明细 计算条数

Hudson Bay Mining & Smelting Co. v. R., 99 DTC 5269, [1999] 3 CTC 76 (FCA)-- summary under Paragraph 20(1)(c) Summary Under Tax Topics- Income Tax Act- Section 20- Subsection 20(1)- Paragraph 20(1)(c) The taxpayer repurchased some of its outstanding debentures through brokers. ...

Ahmar – before Strong Forming had to cease operations. In affirming that Mr. Ahmar had not made out the due diligence defence to director liability for failure to remit, Mactavish JA stated (at paras 23 and 24): … Mr. Ahmar made the conscious decision to have Strong Forming defer payment of its HST debt, and to use these revenues to satisfy other obligations in the hopes of turning the company’s financial position around. … … This Court … in Buckingham … state[ed] that the defence under section 323 “should not be used to encourage such failures by allowing a due diligence defence for directors who finance the activities of their corporation with Crown monies on the expectation that the failures to remit could eventually be cured”…. ...

In addition … Mr. Ahmar had periodically injected funds into the company in an attempt to keep things going …. ... Ahmar made the conscious decision to have Strong Forming defer payment of its HST debt, and to use these revenues to satisfy other obligations in the hopes of turning the company’s financial position around. … … This Court … in Buckingham … state[ed] that the defence under section 323 “should not be used to encourage such failures by allowing a due diligence defence for directors who finance the activities of their corporation with Crown monies on the expectation that the failures to remit could eventually be cured”…. ...

In confirming the Tax Court’s finding that the amounts received in the reassessed years were ‘government assistance,” as defined in s. 127(9), Boivin JA stated (at paras. 3-4, TaxIntepretations translation): [T]he Tax Court … concluded that the amounts received by CAE were not made pursuant to an ordinary commercial agreement, having regard to the terms of the agreement and, in particular, the implicit rate of return, which he found to be substantially lower than the market rate for a comparable loan and therefore contrary to the commercial interests of a private lender …. … We are all of the view that the TCC judge properly applied the leading jurisprudential principles in this area as set out in … Consumers' Gas … CCLC Technologies … [and] Immunovaccine Technologies …. ...

In finding that there was no basis to reverse Bopcock J's finding that the taxpayer was liable for a s. 163(2) penalty, Dawson JA stated (at paras 4, 6-7): … [T]he Tax Court articulated the correct legal test for establishing gross negligence: neglect beyond a failure to use reasonable care. … i. The appellant signed his tax return without reviewing or reading it…. ii. … This… “constituted an unusual casualness” on the part of the appellant and reflected “insouciance and an indifferent delegation of responsibility”…. iii. … [T]he appellant arranged for an escrowed investment to be made in an amount to cover his estimated tax liability [which was] inexplicably redeployed contemporaneously with the filing of the 2007 return. … … [T]hese findings … support the Tax Court’s finding of wilful blindness amounting to gross negligence. ...

Canada, 2024 FCA 83-- summary under Subsection 152(1) Summary Under Tax Topics- Income Tax Act- Section 152- Subsection 152(1) CRA must assess “in accordance with the facts and the law” Before noting that a potential reassessment to reduce a cost-of-goods-sold deduction appeared at first glance “not be defensible on the facts and the law” (para. 34), Webb JA stated: The principle that the Minister must assess in accordance with the facts and the law was confirmed … in … Collins Family Trust …. ...

In affirming the findings below by Ouimet J, including that the reassessment of Laplante made after the normal reassessment period was valid, Boivin JA stated (at para. 4): He was … correct to identify a substantive element and an intentional element, being the two elements which must be present in order to conclude that there is a simulation under Article 1451 …. Furthermore … the judge … did not err in finding a simulation in this case, i.e., that the appellant was the true beneficiary of the amounts distributed by DL Trust to the seeming beneficiaries. ...

In the Court of Appeal, Stratas JA stated (at para. 3) that “ Oceanspan is … directly on point … [and] binds us, just as it bound the Tax Court.” ...

In the Court of Appeal, Stratas JA stated (at para. 3) that “ Oceanspan is … directly on point … [and] binds us, just as it bound the Tax Court.” ... Those reasons noted (at para. 39) that a “good example of when section 250.1 operates is subsection 104(13) … [which] may apply to a resident beneficiary of a non-resident trust.” ...

In the Court of Appeal, Stratas JA stated (at para. 3) that “ Oceanspan is … directly on point … [and] binds us, just as it bound the Tax Court.” ...