Search - 司法拍卖网 人民法院

(Canada), 82 DTC 6116, [1982] CTC 121 (BCSC)-- summary under Solicitor-Client Privilege Summary Under Tax Topics- General Concepts- Solicitor-Client Privilege "There is no distinction, for the purpose of a claim to legal professional privilege, between lawyers in private practice and salaried legal advisors such as ", in this case, a lawyer who was vice-president, secretary and general counsel of the petitioner. ...

Helper J.A. found that the appellant was not carrying on business in Manitoba for purposes of the Reciprocal Enforcement of Judgments Act (Manitoba) after noting that two of the criteria in Dicey & Morris, The Conflict of Laws for determining whether a corporation is carrying on business in a jurisdiction are that the business must have some fixed place in the jurisdiction, and the business must have been carried on for a substantial period of time. ...

MNR, 91 DTC 1020, [1991] 2 CTC 2268 (TCC), rev'd 93 DTC 5467 (FCTD)-- summary under Subsection 152(1) Summary Under Tax Topics- Income Tax Act- Section 152- Subsection 152(1) In vacating an assessment of the taxpayer pursuant to s. 227.1 of the Act and corresponding provisions of the Income Tax Act (Ontario), the Unemployment Insurance Act (Canada) and the Canada Pension Plan Act which informed the taxpayer of the aggregate sum assessed under those statutes without giving a breakdown, Rip TCJ. stated (p. 1027): "... in enacting section 152 of the Act, Parliament required the notice of assessment to inform the person to whom it is sent of the amount of the tax the Minister has assessed under authority of that statute.... ...

Trustees of Joseph Reid (1949), 30 TC 431 (HL)-- summary under Paragraph 82(1)(a) Summary Under Tax Topics- Income Tax Act- Section 82- Subsection 82(1)- Paragraph 82(1)(a) dividend also income on general principles In finding that a dividend paid by a South African company out of a capital gain realized by it was "income arising from possessions out of the United Kingdom" for purposes of Case V of Schedule D, Lord Morton stated (p. 446): " Prima facie a dividend paid on shares is income. ...

He stated (at p. 645): "... For a business to exist and to have commenced, one must have gone beyond the stage of merely intending to commence it.... ...

Commissioners for Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs, [2015] BTC 32, [2015] EWCA Civ 1036-- summary under Purpose Summary Under Tax Topics- Statutory Interpretation- Purpose purposive approach entails checking whether overall effect of transaction answers the statutory description Lewison LJ stated (at paras. 20, 50): The parties were largely content to rely on the discussion in Barclays Mercantile Business Finance Ltd v Mawson [2004] UKHL 51, [2005] 1 AC 684 …. ...

I cannot view section 261 … as contemplating a rebate on an error caused by the author's own inattention and carelessness. ...

., after noting (at para. 101) that the French version of s. 152(4)(a)(i) rendered “misrepresentation” as “misrepresentation of facts ” and (at para. 102) that in Canada v. ...

Sarraf considered that a court appeal was a mere continuation of proceedings which had been commenced against the corporation by the Minister’s assessment – but Dawson JA found that Sarraf had failed to consider that the current appeal procedures were quite different from the Income War Tax Act procedures considered in a yet earlier decision. ...

The Queen, 2016 TCC 73 (Informal Procedure)-- summary under Subsection 152(1.6) Summary Under Tax Topics- Income Tax Act- Section 152- Subsection 152(1.6) receipt of notice of redetermination of loss by limited partner not relevant After finding that the presumption in s. 244(20), that notice to the general partner of an LP is notice to all the partners, is conclusive rather than rebuttable, so that a limited partner would not have succeeded even were she able to establish that she had not received notices of determination and redetermination of loss which had been received by the GP, Lafleur J went on to find that even if the s. 244(2) presumption were rebuttable, “the language of subsection 152(1.6) of the Act is clear – whether one or more limited partners have received the notice of determination or not is not relevant for the validity of a notice of determination issued in accordance with subsection 152(1.4) of the Act.” ...