Search - 司法拍卖网 人民法院

Miller J found (at para 32): … It is my view that in a GAAR appeal, draft documents prepared in the context of a taxpayer’s audit or considered by officials involved in or consulted during the audit and assessment of the taxpayer should be disclosed. ...

The Funds argued that they were receiving an exempt financial service from Funding Corp – so that this arrangement in effect eliminated the GST or HST on the portion of the management fees that was assigned to Funding Corp. ...

[T]here is no evidence that shows that the Appellant conveyed a beneficial interest in the aforementioned shares prior to the completion of the purchase and sale arrangement with his family member … [B]ecause the Appellant’s wife and daughters did not have an interest in the 85 Class B, C and D common shares prior to the time they purchased them from the Appellant later on the same day, no benefit was conferred on them directly or indirectly as a consequence of the completion of the capital reorganization of MDPC. ...

. … Essentially, all of the factors outlined in Essa [[1993] OJ No 229]… favour the granting of this motion. ...

Paris J accepted that a corporation (“SVO”) had agreed to manage all of the buildings as well as the common areas as agent for all of the owners, notwithstanding that the taxpayer was only able to provide an unsigned copy of the management agreement – and also accepted that a parking area had subsequently been acquired by SVO as their agent notwithstanding the failure to locate any written agreement to this effect. ...

In his dissenting reasons, Pelletier JA referred inter alia to s. 67(2) of the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act, which reflected an intention that “Parliament put the Crown on the same footing as unsecured creditors” in a bankruptcy” – with an exception for employee source deductions, which “is explained by the fact that source deductions are amounts which belong to the employee in question…[and] this money does not belong to the employer anymore” (paras. 73-74). ...

. … The gravamen of the offence under subsection 163(2) is making of a false statement, knowing (actually or constructively, i.e., through wilful blindness) that it is false. ...

. … In the circumstances, I have two choices. I can either not allow Ms. ...

. … The tax motivation is a fact. This fact constitutes a backdrop to take into account respecting the trust and its actual activities. ...

[A] document … had to be signed by each of the employees, confirming that they were familiar with the obligation…. ...