Search - 制暴无限杀机 下载

., 2001 SCC 56 … at para. 42). The necessary inference to be drawn from the express language of s. 95(2.4)(b) is that Parliament chose not to include a competition element in the financial institution exception. ...

She also stated (at para. 23) that “there was ample evidence before the Tax Court … to conclude that the test for gross negligence was satisfied.” ...

The Queen, 2022 TCC 34-- summary under Legal Representative Summary Under Tax Topics- Income Tax Act- Section 248- Subsection 248(1)- Legal Representative a de facto executor was a legal representative Wong J rejected the taxpayer’s submissions that he had renounced his executorship shortly after being appointed and that his subsequent acts in jointly (with his brother) transferring estate property to his daughter were performed qua a trustee de son tort and not as an executor – so that he should not have been assessed under s. 159(3) for unpaid estate taxes given their failure to obtain a clearance certificate. ...

The resulting understanding of legislation as expressed in the jurisprudence is not an improper exercise of judicial legislation, rather it is precisely what courts are required to do …. ...

No discretion is afforded the Minister or the Minister’s agents: “They are required to follow [the Act] absolutely, just as taxpayers are also required to obey it as it stands” (Harris …. ...

This is the role of the legislature, not the courts …. ...

In dismissing a written argument of the taxpayer on appeal, Rennie JA stated (at para. 21): The Tax Court considered the test from Stewart to determine whether the properties were a source of income …. ...

Keeping establishes that the Tax Court’s role is not to evaluate a taxpayer’s business acumen, a principle the Tax Court respected …. ...

Russell J indicated that, in light inter alia of the principle of judicial comity, he would follow the same Kuchta approach (notwithstanding that Kuchta might be technically a nullity as it had been decided by a substituted judge – see High-Crest). ...

Sommerfeldt J found on the evidence (even though the vendors were not parties to the case) that the vendors had never occupied the home as a residence and had sold the home as an adventure in the nature of trade – so that they were builders, and the sale was subject to HST. ...