Search - 司法拍卖网 人民法院

In the Court of Appeal, Stratas JA stated (at para. 3) that “ Oceanspan is … directly on point … [and] binds us, just as it bound the Tax Court.” ... Those reasons noted (at para. 39) that a “good example of when section 250.1 operates is subsection 104(13) … [which] may apply to a resident beneficiary of a non-resident trust.” ...

. … Denison Mines … [stated] that " the fact that a capital asset, in the sense of an enduring benefit resulting, does not necessarily make the expenditures expended therefor capital expenditures rather than revenue expenditures.” This is … all the more true in matters of eligible capital property and intangible assets where, with the commercial structure in place, sums are committed on a recurring basis in order to maintain the profitable pursuit of activities: Canada Starch …. ...

First, and most importantly, it is uncertain whether the chargeable event – redemption of a credit by viewing or downloading a document- will ever occur. … Secondly, it is not clear when redemption will occur, and by that time a number of features of the service might have changed. … [T]he possibility that the available documents might have changed appears to be a real one. ... [T]he elements of uncertainty… are sufficiently important to exclude the application of the prepayment rules contained in section 6(4) … and article 65.... of the Principal VAT Directive. If a prepayment is to be chargeable to VAT, it must relate to a particular supply of goods or services, with a direct link between the goods or services and the consideration paid in advance. … [W]e are of the opinion that the uncertainties in the present case are so material that the payment made when PAYG credits are purchased cannot be considered a prepayment towards the cost of any particular search. … … The supply is the viewing and downloading of documents, but it cannot be known at the time when the payment is made how many credits will actually be used and how many will remain unredeemed. ...

Alan & Company Limited v El Nasr Export & Import Company, [1972] 2 QB 189, [1972] 2 All ER 127 … held that no consideration needed to be moving from the party which benefits from the waiver. … …If I am in error … that [no] consideration is required, I am of the view that there is good and valid consideration flowing to the Appellant. The Appellant received the benefit of not having to spend any time or effort or cost because her appeal did not proceed … [and] the Respondent held the Appellant’s objections in abeyance, and ensured the Appellant’s assessments would be confirmed in accordance with the lead case. ... Respecting “undue pressure,” he stated (at para 26): The case law … appears to point quite strongly that where CRA says to the Appellant either sign the waiver or we will close the file that is not undue pressure (McGonagle v The Queen, 2009 TCC 168.... ...

The Centre promptly commenced this application in the FCA under s. 168(2)(b) of the Act and Rule 300(b) of the Federal Courts Rules for an order prohibiting publication of a copy of the notice of intention to revoke – and thus prohibiting the revocation itself – until a later date based on the timing of when the Minister has disposed of its objection to the notice. In dismissing the application for this order, Laskin JA stated (at paras 15, 18- 20): It is a long-established principle that irreparable harm cannot be inferred, but must be established by clear and compelling evidence … [T]he evidence … does not meet the required standard [of irreparable harm]. ... The evidence that significant numbers of parents would withdraw their children from the school within one or two months is also neither clear nor compelling. … While the Centre asserts that “[t]he loss of tuition revenue and the reduction of the donor base for School related fundraising will make ABCO financially incapable of operating the School, leading to its closure,” it has not …provided its current budget or other supporting financial information. … Its financial statements for 2016 also show an excess of revenues over expenditures of $307,242. … …[T]he evidence is in our view insufficient to establish irreparable harm. ...

In finding that her motor vehicle travel expenses of close to $13,000 for 2015 “were incurred for travelling in the course of the... employment,” and in allowing the taxpayer’s appeal, Russell J stated (at paras 7, 12): … Campbell … established that when the work circumstances reasonably require that the worker have an office, and an office is not provided by the employer, then the worker can locate the required office somewhere including in their home and have it regarded as an employment location. That is, travel from the home office where much of the employment work is done, to the employer’s place of business for meetings etc., and return, constitutes employment travel and not personal travel. … [T]he appellant’s Form T2200 is clear that her employer, CCI, required her to work from a home office and specifying that 90% of her work would be from there. … [T]he appellant did not have appropriate office facilities available for her at CCI’s Oakville location. ...

Canada (Revenue Agency), 2020 FC 1156-- summary under Paragraph 16(1)(b) Summary Under Tax Topics- Other Legislation/Constitution- Federal- Access to Information Act- Section 16- Subsection 16(1)- Paragraph 16(1)(b) audit techniques re application of s. 94.1, and risk assessment tool used to manage the risks of an ongoing audit, were exempted The applicants, who were awarded damages in Ludmer regarding CRA’s conduct of its audit of their investments in an off-shore company and who had been denied full access to 8,041 out of 38,090 pages of documents that had been identified as covered by their requests under s. 6 of the Access to Information Act (“ ATIA ”), sought judicial review under s. 41 of the ATIA of CRA’s decision to exempt various of such documents from disclosure. In rejecting the applicants’ submission that CRA’s reliance upon s. 16(1)(b) “to exempt virtually all records flowing from an audit is contrary to the wording, spirit and intent of the ATIA,” Bell J.stated (at para. 102): [T[he term “investigation”, in these circumstances, includes tax audits. … Furthermore, in this case the exempt information consists of either audit techniques used by the CRA to identify or guide its auditors in applying s. 94.1 … or a risk assessment tool used to evaluate and manage the risks of an ongoing audit. ...

Thus, the “series’ overall result [was] consistent with the object, spirit and purpose of the capital gains regime as previously identified by this Court—that is, to tax real economic gains: Triad Gestco … “ (para. 54). ...

In the Court of Appeal, Stratas JA stated (at para. 3) that “ Oceanspan is … directly on point … [and] binds us, just as it bound the Tax Court.” ...

In declining the taxpayer’s application, Grammond J. stated (at paras. 9 – 11): One of the objectives of section 152 … is to ensure the finality of assessments by precisely setting out the circumstances in which a reassessment can be issued. To that end, Parliament has established the normal reassessment period …. ... After referring to the submission of the taxpayer that the Act should be interpreted similarly to s. 1010(2)(a) of the Quebec Taxation Act, which provided: The Minister may … make a reassessment … within three years after the day of sending of an original assessment … for a taxation year or the day on which a fiscal return for the taxation year is filed, whichever is later Grammond J stated (at para. 16): [S]ubsection 152(3.1) … does not provide that the normal reassessment period can begin at the time when the taxpayer files a tax return, if that time is after a first notice of assessment is sent. ...