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

As I see it, therefore the $810,000 was for all the physical assets involved — land and buildings (including the gas pumps). ... Also, I would emphasize that the Act is perfectly clear — the principal residence is the housing unit — and only the housing unit — anything beyond that is apparently a concession to practicality and reasonableness. ... I note, merely for the record, that the “access” allowed by the Minister was in fact a 66-foot wide road allowance — generous — perhaps over-generous — as a private right of way to the housing unit by any reasonable standard. ...

The issues in the appeals are whether the respondent correctly calculated the profit realized from the sale of a property owned in partnership by Victor Gusso and his spouse Jean Gusso on a / / basis and whether or not mortgage interest payments were deductible from the appellants’ 1978 income. ... Mr Gusso’s share of the profit (%) therefore was $7,491.79 and Mrs Gusso’s share was $3,745.89 to be included in the appellants’ business income. 3. ...

This is why a management company named GMBD Ltée (“G” for Mr Gagnon, “M” for Mr Martin, “B” for Mr Bélanger and “D” for Mr Dumoulin — the four key men in MSS Inc) was incorporated to hold a majority of the MSS Inc shares. ... From this date onward, dividends and management fees were paid by the appellant to GMBD Ltée as follows: 1976 1977 Dividends $ 37,014 $ 58,904 Management fees $ 33,600 $ 40,800 The appellant’s turnover was as follows: $4,531,350 in 1976 $3,961,061 In 1977 This reduction of $900,000 in 1977 is explained by an eight-month strike at Alcan: this company represented 50 per cent of the appellant company’s sales. ...

These figures read as follows: Year Gross Income Net Losses 1973 $ 500 $ 817 1974 500 1,500 1975 115 1,294 1976 1,085 578 1977 1,391 1,133 1978 1,019 2,840 1979 4,196 1,042 3.09 The two purposes of the appellant in purchasing the farm in 1973 were to use the farmhouse as a residence and to improve the land and outbuildings to a state that he could draw an additional income from the operation “which, at a later stage, could become the only income” (paragraph 2 of Notice of Appeal). 3.10 His salary at the Royal Bank of Canada in 1980 was $29,000. ... Law — Case Law — Analysis 4.01 Law The provisions of the Income Tax Act involved in the present case are paragraphs 18(1)(a), (h), subsections 31(1) and 248(1) — definitions of “farming” and “personal or living expenses”. ...

Income Tax Act, RSC 1952, c 148 — 5(1)(a) — Employee benefit. The appellant was an employee of IMC Ltd at Esterhazy, Saskatchewan. ... On this basis, I will summarize the facts and nature of the dispute as follows: The appellant was an employee of International Minerals & Chemical Corporation (Canada) Limited (referred to hereinafter as IMC) which operated a potash plant at Esterhazy, Saskatchewan, from approximately November 1961 to December 1968. ... In the alternative, he submits that the benefit — if any — should have been spread over the taxation years 1962 to 1967, in which case the Taxation Division should have collected the additional tax from IMC. ...

The taxpayer reported, on his return of income for the 1975 taxation year, a capital gain on the disposition of the following property (all in the Province of Manitoba (“the property”)): S / 18-35-25W S / 28-35-25W S / 20-35-25W S / 17-35-25W SE /4 7-35-25W NE /4 8-35-25W The reported proceeds of disposition on the property were $170,000. ... A real estate listing agreement dated February 12, 1975 between the appellant and C & L Realty Limited was also introduced into evidence as Exhibit A-20. ... Write stating full particulars to: C & L Realty, 2727 Portage Avenue, Winnipeg, Man. ...

The notice of appeal reads in part as follows: — On December 31, 1971, during the years on appeal and even today, the appellant was and still is a farmer. — On December 31, 1971, during the years on appeal and even today, the appellant was and still is the owner of a property located in the town of Mascouche, which he had acquired from his father on June 11, 1963. — Long before December 31, 1971, the town of Mascouche had experienced, and was still experiencing during the years on appeal, a substantial amount of property development. — On December 31, 1971, such development was occurring on land adjacent to the appellant’s land. — During the years on appeal, various sales of parcels of land were made by the appellant. — By notices of assessment issued on January 20, 1977, the respondent assessed a capital gain for the years on appeal, relying on the fact that the fair market value of the appellant’s land on December 31, 1971 was three cents ($0.03) per square foot. — On June 23, 1977, the appellant filed notices of objection to the said assessments. — To lend support to his notices of objection, the appellant asked Les Estimateurs Professionnels Leroux, Beaudry, Picard et Associés Inc to prepare an appraisal of his land, dated December 31, 1971. — The said report established that the value of the said land was nine cents ($0.09) per square foot. In his reply to the notice of appeal, the respondent states: — Pursuant to agreements of sale between the purchaser and the appellant in 1973, the latter sold various parcels of land in 1973, 1974 and 1975; — the sale price for the various properties had been agreed to between the parties in 1973 when the agreements of sale were signed; — as a result of the sales of these properties, the appellant reported the following amounts as Capital gains: Statement of sale of capital property 1973 Sale of 70,872 sq ft at 8¢ per sq ft $ 5,669.76 Value on 31/12/71:.0772 per sq ft 5,315.40 Capital gain $ 354.36 Statement of sale of capital property 1974 Sale of 55,449 sq ft at 8¢ per sq ft $44,279.92 Value on 31/12/71:.0772 per sq ft 41,512.42 Capital gain $ 2,767.50 Statement of sale of capital property 1975 First sale Sale of 321,685 sq ft at 80 per sq ft $25,734.80 Value on 31/12/71:.0772 per sq ft 24,126.37 Capital gain $ 1,608.43 Second sale Sale of 30,165 sq ft $ 3,000.00 Value on 31/12/71:.0772 per sq ft 2,262.00 Capital gain $ 738.00 Total Capital Gain $ 2,346.43 — the respondent appraised the said properties in order to determine their value on December 31, 1971 and valued them at.02770 per sq ft; — accordingly, by assessments dated July 7, 1978, the respondent established the following amounts as capital gains: 1973 Proceeds of disposition $ 5,669.76 Adjusted cost basis (.02770 per sq ft) 1,963.15 Revised capital gain $ 3,706.61 1974 Proceeds of disposition $44,279.92 Adjusted cost basis (.02770 per sq ft) 15,330.54 Revised capital gain $28,949.38 1975 Proceeds of disposition $28,734.80 Adjusted cost basis (.02770 per sq ft) 9,746.24 Revised capital gain $18,988.56 Contentions For the appellant: — The respondent’s appraisal is unacceptable, because it does not take into account the special location of the appellant’s property. — The appraisal by Les Estimateurs Professionnels Leroux, Beaudry, Picard & Associés Inc, a copy of which is attached as an integral part hereof, is the only fair appraisal in the circumstances. For the respondent: — The burden of showing that the respondent’s appraisal is incorrect rests on the appellant. ...

In fact, the appellant had his office in the same building as A H Roy & Associates. ... The assets of A H Roy & Associates could not be taken into consideration in evaluating the goodwill. ... McNeely, Lecompte & Associates Limited was then incorporated, with the appellants as principal shareholders. ...

(SN pp 8 and 9) 3.07 Mr Moore also spoke to Mr Boddy of Marsh & McLennan Limited: In talking to Mr Boddy at — Mr Boddy is with Marsh & McLennan, I spoke to them to try to determine what service if any Mr McMillan had provided to them. ... He said that the appellant had to hold a valid insurance broker’s license: Because we — we felt that — we were treating it as a sub-agent. ... Law — Cases at law — Analysis 4.01. Law section 3 of the Income Tax Act is the section involved in the present case. 4.02. ...

. — The business of the partnership was the development of a racquet club in Richmond Hill. — The Appellant and his partners each spent a considerable amount of time working on the development of such a facility but ultimately discontinued the business on June 1, 1978 after the partnership failed to obtain permits from the Town of Richmond Hill for such a facility. — The partnership incurred a loss of $10,124 in the fiscal period ended June 30, 1977. ... Notwithstanding the contentions of counsel for the appellant, it is my view that the reverse is the situation in this appeal — “Richmond Hill Squash Club” was not a “business” to operate and earn income from a squash club — but only to investigate the feasibility of doing so. ... But the amounts involved, if deductible at all, would be deductible from the income — if any — of the corporation(s) in the circumstances of this case. ...