Search - 司法拍卖网 人民法院

The Respondent has also pleaded in the Reply that if the penalties are not warranted under subsection 163(2) then the penalties for 1991 and 1992 are justified under subsection 163(1), because the Appellant was convicted of failing to report a part of his income for the year 1989. [2] The Appellant, during the years in question, was engaged in a business with his brother Jeff under the name G & H Cabinets. ... The business was incorporated at the beginning of 1990 under the name G & H Cabinets Ltd., and they continued to operate it on the basis of equal ownership. [3] The Appellant's position with respect to the assessments is that he was the person concerned with the operational aspects of the business, and that his brother was responsible for the financial side. ... He later opened his own renovation business, and became a customer of G & H Cabinets Ltd. ...

Reasons for Judgment Lamarre, J.T.C.C. [1] The appellant is appealing from net worth assessments made by the Minister of National Revenue ("the Minister") under the Income Tax Act ("the Act ") for the 1993, 1994 and 1995 taxation years. ... STATEMENT OF NET WORTH SCHEDULE I------------------------------------------------- December 1992--------------- December 1993-------------- December 1994-------------- December 1995--------------- ASSETS------------ Business assets------------------- Account at credit union #45213 2,156.20 1,096.30 5,059.66 246.57 Business's truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vacuum 0.00-------------- 0.00------------- 13,050.00-------------- 10,440.00-------------- Total business assets $2,156.20-------------- $1,096.30------------- $18,109.66-------------- $10,686.57-------------- Personal assets------------------- Credit union #33351 chequing 0.77 0.17 8.44 349.14 Credit union #33351 savings 859.41 9,530.73 16,788.47 23,691.32 Credit union term savings 0 0 0 25,000.00 Personal cottage 0.00 0.00 0.00 4,800.00 Land associated with cottage 0.00 0.00 30,000.00 30,000.00 Wedding money for cottage 12,000.00--------------- 12,000.00-------------- 0.00-------------- 0.00--------------- Total personal assets $12,860.18-------------- $21,530.90-------------- $46,796.91-------------- $83,840.46-------------- TOTAL ASSETS $15,016.38 $22,627.20 $64,906.57 $94,527.03 STATEMENT OF NET WORTH SCHEDULE II------------------------------------------------- 1992------------- 1993------------- 1994------------- 1995------------- LIABILITIES------------------ Business liabilities----------------------- Bank overdraft 0.00-------------- 0.00-------------- 0.00-------------- 0.00--------------- Total business liabilities 0.00-------------- 0.00-------------- 0.00-------------- 0.00--------------- Personal liabilities 0.00-------------- 0.00-------------- 0.00-------------- 0.00--------------- Total personal liabilities $0.00-------------- $0.00-------------- $0.00-------------- $0.00--------------- TOTAL LIABILITIES $0.00-------------- $0.00-------------- $0.00-------------- $0.00--------------- Net worth 15,016.38-------------- 22,627.20-------------- 64,906.57-------------- 94,527.03-------------- Previous year's net worth 0.00-------------- 15,016.38-------------- 22,627.20-------------- 64,906.57------------- Increase (decrease) in net worth $15,016.38 $7,610.82 $42,279.37 $29,620.46 STATEMENT OF NET WORTH SCHEDULE III------------------------------------------------- 1993------------- 1994------------- 1995------------- Increase (decrease) in net worth 7,610.82 42,279.37 29,620.46 Adjustments for computing total income for tax purposes------------------------------------- Additions: Personal expenses (see Schedule IV) 31,205.90 31,612.73 32,281.52 Tax payment- client 0.00 0.00 0.00 Tax payment 0.00-------------- 0.00-------------- 0.00--------------    Total additions $31,205.90-------------- $31,612.73-------------- $32,281.52-------------- Deductions: Amount received for sale of trailer (father) 0.00 0.00 15,900.00 Sales tax (ON) on sale of trailer 0.00 0.00 1,272.00 Non-taxable portion of capital gain 0.00 0.00 0.00 Tax refund- Jean Drouin 664.55 0.00 0.00 Tax refund- Johanne Laurin 6,594.00 0.00 0.00 GST rebate- Jean Drouin 2,246.75 713.00 713.00 Child tax credit- Ms. ... Laurin 0.00 0.00 0.00 Money received for business association 5,000.00-------------- 6,650.00-------------- 6,650.00-------------- Total deductions $18,563.57-------------- $11,507.00-------------- $28,552.30-------------- Net adjustments $12,642.33-------------- $20,105.73-------------- $3,729.22-------------- Total income calculated on net worth basis $20,253.15-------------- $62,385.10-------------- $33,349.68-------------- Minus: total income reported   - Jean Drouin- Johanne Laurin 9,517.03 3,300.00-------------- 6,833.00 0.00-------------- 8,196.00 0.00-------------- Discrepancy per net worth $7,436.12 $55,552.10 $25,153.68 ANALYSIS OF DISCREPANCY PER NET WORTH SCHEDULE V----------------------------------------------------------------------- 1993------------- 1994------------- 1995------------- Discrepancy per net worth (according to Schedule III) 7,436.12-------------- 55,552.10-------------- 25,153.68-------------- Deduct: known audit adjustments------------------------------------------ Overstated unsupported expenses 9,967.44 12,969.67 11,797.14 Taxable capital gain 0.00 0.00 0.00 Capital cost allowance allowed 0.00--------------- (1,450.00)--------------- (2,610.00)-------------- Total known audit adjustments $9,967.44--------------- $11,519.67--------------- $9,187.14-------------- Unreported business income per net worth $(2,531.32) $44,032.44 $15,966.54 [3] The appellant is contesting the unreported business income per net worth as computed in Schedule V. ...

Reasons for Judgment (Delivered orally from the bench on February 14, 2000, at Montréal, Quebec, and amended at Ottawa, Ontario, on February 25, 2000) Lamarre Proulx, J.T.C.C. [1] This is an appeal in which the issue is whether the reassessment in respect of the 1994 taxation year was mailed on May 14, 1998. [2] Subsections 244(15) and 244(14) of the Income Tax Act (the “ Act”) provide that an assessment is deemed to have been made on the day of mailing of the notice of the assessment. ... Analysis [10] Subsections 244(14) and 244(15) of the Act read as follows: (14) Mailing date — For the purposes of this Act, the day of mailing of any notice or notification described in subsection 149.1(6.3), 152(4) or 166.1(5) or of any notice of assessment shall be presumed to be the date of that notice or notification. (15) Date when assessment made — Where any notice of an assessment has been sent by the Minister as required by this Act, the assessment shall be deemed to have been made on the day of mailing of the notice of the assessment. [11] According to the decision of the Federal Court of Appeal in Aztec Industries Inc. v. ...

shall refer to as the " adjoining land”. Part of the north east quarter which had been sold to third parties was a 20-acre parcel in the north west corner which had been purchased by the Town of Cold Lake for a playground. ... When filing their 1980 income tax returns, each of the appellants reported a capital gain of $571,430 with respect to the sale of the subject land but reduced the gain to nil by deducting a reserve under subsection 40(1) of the Act and the cost of ” replacement property" under subsection 44(1). ... For the years 1977 and 1978, all four appellants filed returns showing (a) no indication that they were engaged in any kind of farming; and (b) a statement of fishing revenue and expenses under the name “Antoine Lefebvre & Sons” allocating the profit or loss from fishing equally among the father and the four appellants. ...

Peter Jennewein, the appellants son, completed the evidence by his testimony. 3.01 The facts are as follows: On September 15, 1986, the respondent issued assessment notice number 581815 (the " assessment") claiming $20,344.70 in income tax from the appellant. ... The appellant lived in the said building from 1979 to 1982 and personally paid the municipal taxes and maintenance costs in spite of the "right of habitation without charge” she had granted by Exhibit 1-1. 3.06 Peter Jennewein's testimony revealed the following facts: — The amount of $47,000 was never paid the appellant in spite of the stipulation of the deed of sale; — Mrs. ...

Also that the controversy concerning what is described in the pleadings as the ” Somerset property" is conceded to the respondent. Disputes remain regarding two residential properties, one of which is on Brunt Road at Nanoose Bay on Vancouver Island (“ Brunt") and the other at 330 Cambridge Street, Nanaimo (Cambridge"). ... Clark & Son Ltd. v. M.N.R. (1957), 18 Tax A.B.C. 196; 57 D.T.C. 567 (T.A.B.); Merrett v. ...

The only matter with which I have jurisdiction to deal in these cases are the amounts that were allegedly owing by N & K Merchandising Ltd., a body corporate, for unpaid income taxes in the amount of $1,043.63 in respect of unremitted deductions of tax and interest under the provisions of subsection 227.1 of the Income Tax Act, R.S.C. 1952, c. 148 (am. ... Insofar as Patricia Noonan is concerned, she was a minority shareholder and director of N & K Merchandising Ltd. ... If she did not know she was a director, she should have known,” is his position, " she had 25% of the shares and she invested $12,500, so it is not reasonable she would not have known who were the directors," according to him. ...

Carew each owned a 50 per cent interest in a partnership called A & A Enterprises. ... From 1983 to 1985 Tourism produced the following income: Taxation Gross Net Income Appellant's Year Income Expenses (Loss) Snare are 1983 $1,715 $28,357.18 ($26,642.18) $13,321.09 1984 $2,250 $29,643.42 ($27,393.42) $13,696.71 1985 $2,700 $21,598.08 ($18,898.08) $ 9,449.04 The appellant, in his returns of income for the years in issue, sought to deduct these losses as expenses incurred for the purpose of producing income. ... The Minister of National Revenue (the Minister) disallowed the losses claimed by the appellant with respect to tourism as well as 50 per cent of the additional expenses claimed which related to tourism as follows: Tourist 50% of Additional Total Loss Year Activity Loss Expenses Disallowed 1983 $13,321 $1,844 $15,165 1984 $13,696 $2,376 $16,072 1985 $ 9,449 $4,647 $14,096 The disallowance was based on the Minister’s assumption that the appellant did not have a reasonable expectation of profit from tourism during the taxation years in issue. ...

They read as follows: 8(1) In computing a taxpayer's income for a taxation year from an office or employment, there may be deducted such of the following amounts as are wholly applicable to that source or such part of the following amounts as may reasonably be regarded as applicable thereto: (m) the amount in respect of contributions to registered pension plans that, by reason of subsection 147.2(4), is deductible in computing the taxpayer's income for the year; 147.2(4) There may be deducted in computing the income of an individual for a taxation year ending after 1990 an amount equal to the aggregate of (a) the aggregate of all amounts each of which is a contribution (other than a prescribed contribution) made by the individual in the year to a registered pension plan in respect of a period after 1989, to the extent that the contribution was made in accordance with the plan as registered, (b) the least of (i) the amount, if any, by which (A) the aggregate of all amounts each of which is a contribution (other than an additional voluntary contribution or a prescribed contribution) made by the individual in the year or a preceding taxation year and after 1945 to a registered pension plan in respect of a particular year before 1990, if all or any part of the particular year is included in the individual's eligible service under the plan and if (1) in the case of a contribution that the individual made before March 28, 1988 or was obliged to make under the terms of an agreement in writing entered into before March 28, 1988, the individual was not a contributor to the plan in the particular year, or (II) in any other case, the individual was not a contributor to any registered pension plan in the particular year exceeds (B) the aggregate of all amounts each of which is an amount deducted, in computing the individual’s income for a preceding taxation year, in respect of contributions included in the aggregate determined in respect of the individual for the year under clause (A), (ii) $3,500, and (iii) the amount determine by the formula ($3,500 x Y) — Z where Y is the number of calendar years before 1990 each of which is a year (A) all or any part of which is included in the individual's eligible service under a registered pension plan to which the individual has made a contribution that is included in the aggregate determined under clause (i)(A) and in which the individual was not a contributor to any registered pension plan, or (B) all or any part of which is included in the individual's eligible service under a registered pension plan to which the individual has made a contribution (I) that is included in the aggregate determined under clause (i)(A), (Il) that the individual made before March 28, 1988 or was obliged to make under the terms of an agreement in writing entered into before March 28, 1988, and in which the individual was not a contributor to the plan, and Z is the aggregate of all amounts each of which is an amount deducted, in computing the individual’s income for a preceding taxation year, (A) in respect of contributions included in the aggregate determined in respect of the individual for the year under clause (i)(A), or (B) under subparagraph 8(1)(m)(ii) (as it read in its application to the 1990 taxation year) in respect of additional voluntary contributions made in respect of a year that satisfies the conditions in the description of Y, and (c) the lesser of (i) the amount, if any, by which (A) the aggregate of all amounts each of which is a contribution (other than an additional voluntary contribution, a prescribed contribution ora contribution included in the aggregate determined in respect of the individual for the year under clause (b)(i)(A)) made by the individual in the year or a preceding taxation year and after 1962 to a registered pension plan in respect of a particular year before 1990 that is included, in whole or in part, in the individual's eligible service under the plan exceeds (B) the aggregate of all amounts each of which is an amount deducted, in computing the individual’s income for a preceding taxation year, in respect of contributions included in the aggregate determined in respect of the individual for the year under clause (A), and (ii) the amount, if any, by which $3,500 exceeds the aggregate of the amounts deducted by reason of paragraphs (a) and (b) in computing the individual’s income for the year. 32. ... Accordingly, A.V.C.s are excluded from the ambit of the rules in paragraph 147.2(4)(b) and (c) concerning service before 1990 — ie they are not deductible thereunder. ... Meany entitled, “ Income Tax Rules Affecting Pensions and Pension Plans”, in Pensions: Advising Clients in a Changing Environment, The Law Society of Upper Canada, Department of Continuing Education (Oct., 1991). ...

:—The appellant purchased a residential unit (the''unit") and in January of 1988 sold the unit and made a profit of $47,292 (the ” profit"). ... In addition, the Minister levied penalties (the " penalties”) under subsection 163(2) of the Income Tax Act, R.S.C. 1952, c. 148 (am. ... Each of the verbs in the language “ participated in, assented to or acquiesced in” connotes an element of knowledge on the part of the principal and that there must be concurrence of the principal's will to the act or omission of his agent, or a tacit and silent concurrence therein. ...