Search - 司法拍卖网 人民法院

I.                    Background [3]                The Appellant claimed losses in relation to three activities – from his commission arrangement with PanelForm International Ltd. ... IV.              Analysis A.                 Procedural Fairness [13]            The Appellant’s allegation of procedural unfairness relates to the conduct of the hearing. ... V.                 Conclusion [42]            As a result, I would dismiss the appeal with costs. ...

MONAGHAN J.A.     BETWEEN: RISTORANTE A MANO LIMITED Appellant and THE MINISTER OF NATIONAL REVENUE Respondent Heard at Halifax, Nova Scotia, on March 23, 2022. ... THE MINISTER OF NATIONAL REVENUE     PLACE OF HEARING: Halifax, Nova Scotia   DATE OF HEARING: March 23, 2022   REASONS FOR JUDGMENT BY: MONAGHAN J.A.   ... LASKIN J.A.   DATED: August 31, 2022   APPEARANCES: Brian Casey QC For The Appellant   Devon E. ...

II.                  Statutory provisions [6]                The provisions in issue in this appeal are unique to insurance corporations. ... VI.               Analysis – Subsection 138(11.3) of the Act [18]            At the hearing of this appeal SCDA raised a new argument that was not raised before the Tax Court and that was not in its memorandum of fact and law. ... VIII.          Conclusion [34]            As a result I would dismiss the appeal with costs. ...

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT BY:                                MALONE J.A. ... ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA PLACE OF HEARING:                                                        Edmonton, AB DATE OF HEARING:                                                           December 13, 2004 REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT             D I CARY, ROTHSTEIN, MALONE JJ.A. DELIVERED FOR THE BENCH BY:                               MALONE, J.A. ...

MINISTER OF NATIONAL REVENUE   MOTION DEALT WITH IN WRITING WITHOUT APPEARANCE OF PARTIES REASONS FOR ORDER BY: RIVOALEN J.A.   ... LOCKE J.A.   DATED: JUNE 9, 2021   WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS: Nicolas X. Cloutier Samuel Julien Karine Joizil   For the appellant   Pierre Lamothe Chantal Roberge Nancy Azzi   For the respondent   SOLICITORS OF RECORD: McCarthy Tétrault L.L.P. Montreal, Quebec   FOR THE APPELLANT   Nathalie G. Drouin Deputy Attorney General of Canada For the respondent     ...

I.                    Background [3]                The facts are fully set forth in the judge’s reasons. ... II.                 Standard of review [7]                The issues on appeal raise questions of mixed fact and law. ... III.              Analysis A.                  The efficacy of the resignations [9]                The judge erred in concluding that the respondents resigned as directors. ...

HIS MAJESTY THE KING   PLACE OF HEARING: Montreal, Quebec     DATE OF HEARING: June 8, 2022     REASONS FOR JUDGMENT BY: LEBLANC J.A.     ... GLEASON J.A.     DATED: SEPTEMBER 15, 2022     APPEARANCES: Guillaume Rochon Marie Arcand For the appellant CONTACT LENS KING INC.   ... Montreal, Quebec For the appellant CONTACT LENS KING INC.   A. François Daigle Deputy Attorney General of Canada Ottawa, Ontario   For the respondent HIS MAJESTY THE KING     ...

Phénix, 2001 DTC 5367 (FCA)                                                                                                                                    Date: 20001213                                                                                                                                 Docket: A-667-97 BETWEEN: HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN Appellant- and- ROBERT PHÉNIX Respondent ASSESSMENT- REASONS FRANÇOIS PILON Assessment Officer [1]         This is an assessment of the respondent's bill of costs pursuant to the judgment rendered on September 12, 2000 dismissing the appeal with costs. [2]         On October 31, 2000, Mr. ... Four units would seem quite reasonable to me in the circumstances. [9]         Finally, Ms. ... Halifax, Nova Scotia December 13, 2000                          François Pilon                       Assessment Officer Certified true translation Suzanne M. ...

REASONS FOR ORDER BY: RENNIE J.A.   Date: 20191022 Docket: A-244-19 Citation: 2019 FCA 257 Present:   RENNIE J.A. ... DATED: OCTOBER 22, 2019   WRITTEN REPRESENTATIONS BY: Douglas C. Hodson   For The Appellant   Forrest C. Hume Monique Evans   For The Respondent, Freight Management Association of Canada   Lucia M. ...

That was the problem raised in Mark Resources Inc. v. /?., [4] as in Canwest Broadcasting Ltd. v. /?.. ... He bases the latter requirement — the net income concept — on Mr. Justice Pigeon’s decision in Quebec (Deputy Minister of Revenue) v. ... In addition, a table the respondent provided shows that for the years in question, an investor derived, with respect to the taxation of his or her in- come, no tax benefit from the fact that the borrowed amounts had been invested in offshore companies instead of Canadian companies [73] ^: Dividend Gross-Up & Tax Credit (Individuals) Dividend Deduction- Part 1 (Corporations) Basis of Examples • Incremental income of $1,000 • Income is interest income (investment income) • Income is not subject to withholding tax ° CCPC: Canadian Controlled Private Corporation ¢ NR Corporation not resident in Canada not subject to income tax in any jurisdiction Facts • Individual tax rates (Federal) 47% (max) ITA 117(5) • Dividend gross-up: A of the dividend paid: subsection 82(1) of the Income Tax Act • Dividend Tax Credit: A of gross-up: section 121 • Dividend Refund: lesser of RDTH and ’A dividend paid ¢ RDTH Refundable Portion of Part I Tax plus Part IV Tax payable minus dividend refunds of previous years • Refundable Portion of Part I Tax: 25% of Investment Income (simplified) • Part IV Tax: *A of Taxable Dividends received from Taxable Canadian corporations Assumptions • Corporate Tax Rate: 50% Federal + Provincial combined ° Individual Tax Rates (Provincial) 30% of Federal Tax Sections 82- Dividend Gross-Up and Sections 121 Dividend Tax Credit Individuals Income from a: CCPC NR Income 1,000 1,000 Less Income from a: CCPC NR Tax Payable @ 50% SOO Net Income after Tax 500 I OOO Plus Dividend Refund 250 Refundable Part I (25% of income) Available for Dividend 750 1,000-, Dividend Received by Individual 750 1,000 Gross-up (’A of the dividend) 250 Section 82 of the Income Tax Act Taxable Income 1,000 1,000 — — —■ ■- Federal Tax @ 47% 470 470 Less Dividend Tax Credit (A x Gross-up) 200 Federal Tax Payable 270 470 Plus Provincial Tax Payable 30% of Fed. 8 I 141 Total Tax Payable 351 611 After Tax Income Dividend Received 750 1,000 Less Tax Payable 35] 611 — After Tax Income 399 389 Section 112-Dividend Deduction Ludco Income from a: CCPC NR Income 1,000 1,000 Less Tax Payable @ 50% 500 Net Income after Tax 500 1,000 Plus Dividend Refund 250 Refundable Part I (25% of Income) Available for Payment of Dividend 750 1,000 — ■■ ■ », — — ■ » ■■ Dividend Received by Ludco 750 1,000 Income from a: CCPC NR Tax Payable Part I 500 Part IV 250 — — Net Income After Tax 500 500 Plus Dividend Refund Refundable Part I (25% of Income) 250 Part IV 250 — ■ ' Available for Payment of Dividend 750 750 In short, neither the investment in offshore companies nor the interest expense the appellants incurred unduly or artificially reduced their income. ...