Search - 包建铎违纪违法案件以案促改以案促治专题组织生活会 个人对照检查

—On the 27th day of May, 1918, Peter Birtwistle, of the city of London, in the province of Ontario, made a deed of settlement of certain real and personal properties to The Trusts & Guarantee Company, Limited, of the city of Toronto, in the said province, as trustee upon the terms and conditions therein set forth. ... It may be convenient to mention here that sec. 4 of the Income War Tax Act, so far as relevant, provides: The following incomes shall not be liable to taxation hereunder:— • (e) the income of any religious, charitable, agricultural and educational institution, board of trade and chamber of commerce. ... The power of the Court to make any order as to payment “of any tax, interest or penalty’’ is similar to the power conferred upon the Minister by section 55 to ‘‘ assess, re-assess or make additional assessments upon any person for tax, interest and penalties.” ...

Being unable to meet certain requirements of the association, the shareholders, including Gairdner who was the dominant figure behind all three companies to be mentioned, decided to incorporate a new company, Gairdner & Company Limited, which I shall call ‘‘the new company’’, to which the company sold its physical equipment. records and good will, for shares in the new company. ...

(hereinafter called ‘‘ Associated’’), a company of which he was for all practical purposes the sole shareholder, was a capital profit and therefore not subject to tax under the provisions of the Income Tax Act, R.S.C. 1952, c. 148. ...

Both in his reply to the notice of appeal to the Tax Appeal Board and in his reply to the notice of appeal to the Exchequer Court, the Minister stated that he relied upon the provisions of Section 127, subsection (5), particularly upon that part of paragraph (a) of the said subsection which provides that for the purposes of the statute, a corporation and one of several persons by whom it is “directly or indirectly controlled’’ shall, without extending the meaning of the expression ‘ 1 to deal with each other at arm’s length”, be deemed not to deal with each other at arm’s length. ...

., at p. 15 says: ‘The owners of the majority of the voting power in a company are the persons who are in effective control of its affairs and fortunes.’ ” Applying these principles, once it is established that a group of shareholders owns a majority of the voting shares of a company, and the same group a majority of the voting shares of a second company, that fact is sufficient, in my opinion, to constitute the two companies associated within the provisions of Section 39 of the Income Tax Act. ...

That the latter meaning attached to the word ‘‘assessment’’, under the Act as it stood before the establishment of the Income Tax Appeal Board and the enactment of Part VIIIA—wherein the above sections are to be found—in substitution to Part VIII, is made clear by the wording of Section 58(1) of the latter Part, reading: ‘ 4 58. (1) Any person who objects to the amount at which he is assessed...”’ ...

  [1] [1967] 2 Ex. C.R. 32, [1967] C.T.C. 88, 67 D.T.C. 5073. ...

In this connection — (i) An enterprise of one of the territories shall not be deemed to have a permanent establishment in the other territory merely because it carries on business dealings in that other territory through a bona fide broker or general commission agent acting in the ordinary course of his business as such; (ii) The fact that an enterprise of one of the territories maintains in the other territory a fixed place of business exclusively for the purchase of goods or merchandise shall not of itself constitute that fixed place of business a permanent establishment of the enterprise; (iii) The fact that a company which is a resident of one of the territories has a subsidiary company which is a resident of the other territory or which carries on a trade or business in that other territory (whether through a permanent establishment or otherwise) shall not of itself constitute that subsidiary company a permanent establishment of its parent company. ...

:—On April 27, 1929, the appellant made a return of his income for the year ending December 31, 1928, which return contained the following entry under Clause 6: ‘‘Income from Dividends *** Received from Waterous Limited, Brantford, Ontario, Dominion of Canada Victory Loan Bonds, maturing November 1st, 1933, as dividend declared payable in bonds; these bonds being tax free as to principal and interest. ...

. —(1) Irrespective of any assessment of land under this Act, every person occupying or using land for the purpose of, or in connection with, any business mentioned or described in this section, shall be assessed for a sum to be called “business assessment” to be computed by reference to the assessed value of the land so occupied or used by him as follows: (a) … (b) Every person carrying on the business of a wholesale merchant, brewer, insurance company, loan company, trust company, express company carrying on business on or in connection with a railway or steam- [Page 62] boats or other vessels, land company, loaning land corporation, bank, banker or any other financial business for a sum equal to 75 per cent of the assessed value. ... Solicitors for the appellants: Feigman & Chernos, Toronto. Solicitors for the respondent: Cassels, Brock, Toronto.   ...