Search - 制暴无限杀机 下载

“Gabrielle St-Hilaire” St-Hilaire J.   Citation: 2024 TCC 43 Date: 20240411 Docket: 2019-3217(IT)G BETWEEN: TIM FUHR, Appellant, and HIS MAJESTY THE KING, Respondent.   ... “Gabrielle St-Hilaire” St-Hilaire J.   CITATION: 2024 TCC 43 COURT FILE NO.: 2019-3217(IT)G 2019-3215(IT)G   STYLE OF CAUSE: TIM FUHR AND HIS MAJESTY THE KING 1499546 ALBERTA LTD. ... Neilson   Firm: Felesky Flynn LLP 2610, 10111 – 104 Ave NW Edmonton, Alberta T5J 0J4 Canada For the Respondent: Shalene Curtis-Micallef Deputy Attorney General of Canada Ottawa, Canada   ...

The following table provides a summary of the documents:   Director(s) of 9033-0010 Québec Inc. ― Based on Documents             Date Director Document Signed by Exhibit               1996                       1996-03-22 è Ajmer and Satnam governing documents Ajmer A‑2               1996-03-29 è Ajmer minutes Ajmer A‑3               1996-03-30 è Ajmer minutes Ajmer and Satnam A‑3               1996-04-18 è Satnam initial declaration Ajmer A‑4               1996-05-02 è Ajmer and Satnam bank forms Satnam I‑1 and I‑2, tab 6, page 5               1996-12-09 è Satnam 1996 annual declaration Ajmer A‑5               1997                       1997-10-15 è Satnam 1997 annual declaration Ajmer A‑6               1998                       1998-12-03 è Satnam 1998 annual declaration Ajmer A‑7               1999                       1999-03-31 (or later) è Ajmer financial statements* Ajmer I‑1 and I‑2, tab 14               *Signed by Ajmer "on behalf of the Board of Directors" on the page entitled "Balance Sheet."             2000                       2000-05-15 (or later) è Ajmer financial statements* Ajmer I‑1 and I‑2, tab 15               *Signed by Ajmer "on behalf of the Board of Directors" on the page entitled "Balance Sheet."             2000-09-25 è Satnam * minutes Ajmer and Satnam A‑1 and A‑3               * Ajmer resigned at the same time.             2000-11-01  (1) è Ajmer 1999 annual declaration Ajmer A‑9               2000-11-01  (2) è Ajmer 2000 annual declaration Ajmer A‑10               2000-11-01   (3) è Ajmer amended declaration u Ajmer A‑11               u According to the amended declaration, the initial declaration and the 1996, 1997 and 1998 annual declarations were incorrect. ...

Signed at Toronto, Ontario, this 8 th day of May 2008.       “D.G.H. Bowman” Bowman, C.J.       ...   [14]     The appeals are therefore dismissed.   Signed at Toronto, Ontario, this 8 th day of May 2008.     ... Bowman,                                                           Chief Justice     DATE OF JUDGMENT &    REASONS FOR JUDGMENT:       May 8, 2008   APPEARANCES:   For the Appellant: The appellant himself     Counsel for the Respondent: Alexandra Humphrey     COUNSEL OF RECORD:          For the Appellant:                           Name:                                                  Firm:          For the Respondent:                    John H. ...

The Queen, 2009 TCC 202 (Informal Procedure)                                                                                                                                                Court File No. 2008-2070(GST)I CITATION: 2009 TCC 202   TAX COURT OF CANADA   IN RE:   The Excise Tax Act       BETWEEN: ANGELA ALFONSI Appellant  - and-     HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN Respondent     * * * * *   REASONS FOR JUDGMENT Delivered orally from the Bench by Justice B. Paris in the Courts Administration Service, Federal Judicial Centre, 180 Queen Street West, Toronto, Ontario on Tuesday, January 13th, 2009   * * * * *     APPEARANCES:   Ms. ... Thang Trieu                                                                                      for the Respondent     Also Present:   Mr. ...

Signed at Ottawa, Canada, this 7th day of January, 2011.     “B. Paris” Paris J.         ... Signed at Ottawa, Canada, this 7th day of January, 2011.     “B. Paris” Paris J.           ... The evidence showed that the Appellant had operated a hair salon in past years [15]     In summary, the reduction to the personal expenditures should be as follows:       2002 2003 2004   Shelter             $6,593.40             $6,593.40             $6,698.52   Haircutting                    382.06                  392.65                 400.04 EI premiums                  963.46                  957.99             1,071.860   TOTAL               $7,923.08                 7,944.04                 $8,170.42 [16]     The Appellant argued that a major source of funds used to pay the personal expenditures was his line of credit, which was a non-taxable source of funds. ...

[OFFICIAL ENGLISH TRANSLATION]     REASONS FOR JUDGMENT, SECOND AMENDMENT   Angers J ... (b) Licence and registration     2001 $ 2002 $ 2003 $ Appellant, according to estimate:-          licence  -          registration   160.00 or half 510.00 or half   160.00 or half 510.00 or half    80.00   255.00 According to calculations:-          licence-        registration   160.00 510.00   160.00 510.00    80.00 255.00 According to receipts at trial:-          licence-        registration   48.00 221.00   48.00 221.00   40.00 221.00   On this issue, the respondent accepts the amounts as indicated on the receipts.   ... (h) Gas, maintenance, repairs     2001 $ 2002 $ 2003 $ Appellant, according to estimate:-          gas      -          repairs     1,000.00 or half 200.00 or half   1,000.00 or half 200.00 or half   800.00   100.00 According to calculations:-          gas-          repairs   1,000.00 200.00   1,000.00 200.00   800.00 100.00   In this category, no specific or reliable evidence was submitted. ...

Miller, J.         Citation: 2009TCC361 Date: 20090710 Docket: 2008-1006(IT)I BETWEEN: CHRISTOPHER BRACKSTONE, Appellant, and   HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN, Respondent.     ... Miller, J. [1]               The Appellant appeals the reassessment of his 2002, 2003 and 2004 taxation years in which the Minister of National Revenue (the “Minister”) disallowed the deduction of various amounts as expenses as follows:   Schedule “A”   2002     As filed   Allowed   In dispute Advertising   1,000  --   1,000 Fuel   2,000   136   1,864 Interest   278   145   133 Motor vehicle   15,751   776   14,975 Legal and accounting   1,600  --   1,600 Telephone and utilities   75  --   75 Start Up costs   10,323   1,034   9,289 Balancing amount   200  --  -- Capital cost allowance  --   245  -- Expenses   31,227   2,336   28,936                 2003     As filed   Allowed   In dispute Advertising   350  --   350 Business tax, fees and dues   60  --   60 Fuel   1,909   364   1,545 Insurance   1,316  --   1,316 Interest   807   807  -- Maintenance and repairs   1,443  --   1,443 Management and administration fees   1,636  --   1,636 Motor vehicle   15,751   747   15,004 Race at Lake Elliot   325  --   325 Cell phone   1,416   231   1,185 Other expenses   3,374   365   3,009 Capital cost allowance  --   441  -- Expenses   28,387   2,955   25,873                 2004     As filed   Allowed   In dispute Business tax, fees and dues   148   88   60 Fuel   374   374  -- Delivery and freight   111   111  -- Interest   543   543  -- Supplies   13,289  --   13,289 Terminal loss   31,200   31,427  -- Expenses   45,665   32,543   13,349   [2]               In 2002, 2003 and 2004 the Appellant was employed on a full time basis with Ford Motor Company of Canada Limited. ...   [14]          The appeal for the 2002 taxation year is allowed. The appeals for the 2003 and 2004 taxation years are dismissed.              ...

The Queen, 2011 TCC 498 (Informal Procedure)         Docket: 2008-2680(IT)I BETWEEN: AHMAD A. ... The appeal from the reassessment made under the Income Tax Act in respect of the 2003 taxation year is dismissed.              Signed at Ottawa, Canada, this 26th day of October 2011.     "Réal Favreau" Favreau J.           ...

It is ordered that the filing fee of $100 be reimbursed to the appellant.                   ... The Minister also took into account the following data to establish the appellant’s undeclared business income:       2003 2004 2005           (a) total kilometrage 46,048 45,668 43,758           (b) less: personal kilometrage 18,419 18,267 17,503           (c) appellant’s kilometrage — business 27,629 27,401 26,255           (d) trips with clients (50 %) 13,814 13,700 13,127           (e) rate … per kilometre $1.20  $1.30  $1.30            (f) number of trips (5 km/client) 2,76[3] 2,740 2,625           (g) income — fare … per kilometre                   13,814 x $1.20  $16,577        13,700 x $1.30    $17,810      13,127 x $1.30      $17,065           (h) departure fare — client $2.50  $2.75  $2.75            (i) tips 10% 10% 10%   [10]          The analysis of the data above allowed the Minister to identify gaps between the gross business income declared and the net business income calculated using the projection method:       2003 2004 2005           (i) income [per] kilometres [traveled] $16,577  $17,810  $17,065           (ii) income — departure fee per client                   2,763 x $2.50  $6,907        2,740 x $2.75    $7,535      2,625 x $2.75      $7,220            (iii) tips                   ($16,577 + $6,907) x 10% $2,349        ($17,810 + $7,535) x 10%   $2,535      ($17,065 + $7,220) x 10%______________ $2,429           (iv) revised gross business income $25,833 $27,880 $26,714           (v) less: gross declared business income $13,660 $13,040 $17,387           (vi) gaps — gross business revenue $12,173 $14,840  $9,327   [11]          Following the appellant’s failure to declare the total income from his taxi company, the Minister established a gross negligence penalty, based on the undeclared net income ...   [12]          The Minister also disallowed, as a result of the business expenses related to the taxi for the years at issue, a part of the appellant’s expenses because his rate of personal vehicle use was 40%, rather than the 20% indicated on his income tax return:       2003 2004 2005           (i) revised personal use 40% 40% 40%           (ii) disallowed expenses (vehicle fees [automobile])                   (a)  $5,530 x 20%        $1,106                  (b) $12,713 x 20%   $2,543               (c)  $14,833 x 20%     $2,967   [13]          Following the calculations above, the Minster made the following changes when calculating the appellant’s income:       2003 2004 2005           (i) undeclared gross business income $12,173  $14,840  $9,327            (ii) disallowed business expenses $1,106 $2,543 $2,967               $13,279 $17,383 $12,294   ANALYSIS   [14]          It is a well-established fact that within the Canadian tax system, the Minister may establish arbitrary assessments, using any appropriate method, while considering specific circumstances. [1] Did the appellant earn undeclared income?   ...

    * * * * *   HEARD BEFORE MR. JUSTICE WEISMAN in the Courts Administration Service, Courtroom Number 6C, 180 Queen Street West, Toronto, Ontario on Friday, March 30, 2007 at 3:17 p.m ...   * * * * *   ORAL REASONS     APPEARANCES:   Mr. Frank Bertucci                                                                           on behalf of the Appellants     Mr. ... I appreciate your assistance, and I wish you a good day.--- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 3:34 p.m.                       ...