Search - 司法拍卖网 人民法院

Leonati, [1996] 3 S.C.R. 458 … at paragraph 51). ...

Hesler CJQ found that their obligations to collect and remit taxes on their fuel sales did not violate the ancestral right to trade freely and openly as protected by s. 35(1) of the Constitution Act, 1982, stating (at para 42): There must… be a reasonable degree of continuity between the ancestral practice being invoked and the modern right being asserted… [T]he practice of trading objects to which the spiritual power symbolic of Orenda attached cannot be the basis of the modern right … to trade freely without hindrance. ...

The Petitioner was … present in India… for 41 days during 2008-09 for rendering the contract of service to IOCL. ...

The information laid before the issuing judge had not addressed any absence of an alternative solution – and Hilton JCA also chided the ARQ for failure to disclose the “material fact” that the law firm in question was acting for the client in the tax dispute with the ARQ. ...

. … The amendment limits the amount by which the amalgamated company may bump the cost of any qualifying partnership interest held by the subsidiary. ...

. … As a result of subsection 204.3(2), the limitation periods in subsection 152(3.1) apply to Part X.1, with modification. ...

. … ...

. … Although Mr. RF works in the construction industry, this does not deprive him of the right to acquire and sell his principal residence if circumstances make it unavoidable or desirable, even if the transactions occur over a relatively short period of time. ...

Canada, 2016 FCA 304-- summary under Investment Contract Summary Under Tax Topics- Income Tax Act- Section 12- Subsection 12(11)- Investment Contract pointless to determine whether an instrument is debt for purposes of whole Act The Federal Court of Appeal dismissed the Barejo appeal – but on the grounds that the Rule 58 question posed to the Tax Court was whether the “notes” in question were debts for purposes of the Act rather than for purposes of s. 94.1 thereof. ...

Canada, 2016 FCA 299-- summary under Section 8.1 Summary Under Tax Topics- Statutory Interpretation- Interpretation Act- Section 8.1 Tax Court can review validity of contract in reviewing assessment Before indicating that it was unnecessary to pass on whether it was beyond the competence of the Tax Court to declare that options were invalid under Quebec law, Noël CJ stated (at para. 42, TaxInterpretations translation): [T]he role of the TCC, when confronted with an argument based on nullity in the context of an appeal under the ITA, cannot be assimilated to that of a Superior Court which has the power to “declare” a contract to be a nullity for all purposes pursuant to section 33, 35 and 142 of the Code of Civil Procedure … (see in comparison Markou v. ...