Search - 司法拍卖网 人民法院

" In making its “with a view to profit” determination, the Court noted that the following principles generally were common ground: [S]haring profits … [is] not an essential characteristic of a partnership [citing Young v. ... It follows that the complex mosaic of generally accepted accounting practice … will generally have little part to play. Fourth … the view to profit need not be the predominant subjective purpose, but it must be part of the partners' subjective purpose. ...

(Canada), 2015 DTC 5067 [at at 5904], 2015 ABQB 327-- summary under Rectification & Rescission Summary Under Tax Topics- General Concepts- Rectification & Rescission requested rectification order to fix bump did not match parties' specific plan at closing The Bump Mistake A predecessor in interest of the applicant ("Viking") entered a multi-step acquisition and restructuring transaction to acquire an arm's length corporation ("Krang"). ... Dario J dismissed the taxpayer's application, stating (at paras. 77, 81 and 82): [T]his is not a case of the parties "wrote it down wrong", but rather the parties got it wrong. … To the extent we are talking only about the increased bump room due to the Krang Debt, the evidence does not establish that the inability to benefit from this tax treatment would have terminated the acquisition, or that the common intent of the parties that drove them to the formation of the transaction was frustrated. … The intent to complete a transaction in the most tax efficient manner possible is not sufficiently specific. ...

BLP Group plc v Commissioners of Customs & Excise, [1995] EUECJ C-4/94 (ECJ (5th Chamber))-- summary under Supply Summary Under Tax Topics- Excise Tax Act- Section 123- Subsection 123(1)- Supply mere borrowing of money is not a supply BLP was a management holding company which provided services to a group of trading companies producing goods for use in the furniture and DIY industries. ... In finding that taking out a loan did not involve a VATable transaction by the borrower at all, even if it pays interest (it was the mere recipient of a service provided by the lender) the Court stated (at para. 47): The taking up of a loan and the selling of an interest in a company are not … operations of the same type for the purposes of the VAT system — nor are they, moreover, for an undertaking's operational purposes, since the income from the sale of shares is part of the undertaking's own resources, whereas the loan is part of its borrowed resources — because that system focuses on transactions and makes a clear distinction between taxable and exempt transactions. ...

The Queen, 2017 TCC 21 (Informal Procedure)-- summary under Scientific Research & Experimental Development Summary Under Tax Topics- Income Tax Act- Section 248- Subsection 248(1)- Scientific Research & Experimental Development no SR&ED without testing The taxpayer was a natural health product company. ... Dahl that is fatal to this appeal. … Boyle J further stated (at para 53): My decision in this case is in no way intended to suggest that literature reviews and consultations with other researchers cannot be qualifying activities giving rise to qualifying expenses as legitimate constituent parts of SR&ED activities. … ...

HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN, 2021 FCA 88-- summary under Scientific Research & Experimental Development Summary Under Tax Topics- Income Tax Act- Section 248- Subsection 248(1)- Scientific Research & Experimental Development requirement for use of the scientific method in SR&ED The taxpayer acknowledged that the work performed by it for which it claimed investment tax credits did not follow the scientific method as described in Northwest Hydraulic, but argued (at para. 6) that “there was no reference to ‘scientific method’ in the text of the definition [of SR&ED]” and, therefore, that requirement should not have been applied to it. In rejecting this submission, Webb JA stated (at para. 8): Kam-Press did not address any … decisions of this Court [endorsing the criteria set out in Northwest Hydraulic] or provide any basis upon which these cases should not be followed. There is no basis to overturn Northwest Hydraulics or the decisions of this Court that have adopted the approach to be followed, as set out therein, to determine if a particular project or activity qualifies as SR&ED. … ...

The Queen, 2015 TCC 323, 2016 DTC 1005 [at 2519] (Informal Procedure)-- summary under Scientific Research & Experimental Development Summary Under Tax Topics- Income Tax Act- Section 248- Subsection 248(1)- Scientific Research & Experimental Development experiments to maximize internet search rankings were not SR&ED The taxpayer was engaged in determining how on-page and off-page variables for websites interrelate to determine their Google (or other internet search engine) ranking and how to structure data to improve such ranking. In finding that this activity did not qualify as SR&ED, C Miller J stated (at para. 9) that “the experiments of submitting several different versions of websites to determine the significance of variables relies on existing technology in a routine manner,” and (at para. 10): Here, the advancement would be the determination of algorithms that relate variables for purposes of ranking sites. … I fail to see how it is a scientific advancement to figure this out. ...

The Queen, 2019 TCC 32 (Informal Procedure)-- summary under Scientific Research & Experimental Development Summary Under Tax Topics- Income Tax Act- Section 248- Subsection 248(1)- Scientific Research & Experimental Development using existing equipment in developing a new product was not R&D The taxpayer, whose business was to embroider or imprint publicizing lettering on clothing engaged in three projects, none of which were found by Lafleur J to qualify as SR&ED. ... Similarly, I am not of the opinion that there was any advancement in the technology; in fact, this Court previously ruled that the newness of a product is not sufficient for demonstrating a technological advancement (Zeuter …). ...

The Queen, 2021 TCC 36-- summary under Scientific Research & Experimental Development Summary Under Tax Topics- Income Tax Act- Section 248- Subsection 248(1)- Scientific Research & Experimental Development alleged SR&ED work was routine engineering The taxpayer was an information technology company that undertook development of dual-purpose shingle sized solar panels that would be indistinguishable at street level from asphalt shingles. In finding that the taxpayer’s work did not qualify as SR&ED, Monaghan J indicated that: she was “not convinced the Appellant had adequate information about the state of relevant knowledge in the field to assess whether there was a technological uncertainty” (para. 76).. solutions identified by the taxpayer to identified challenges, e.g., adding an air gap beneath the shingles to avoid over-heating, and adding support to deal with snow weight issues, appeared “to be the application of routine engineering” (para. 89). the taxpayer’s test results summary pages lacked significant details of the tests’ purposes, the observations made and conclusions drawn. furthermore, the “jurisprudence indicates that the documentation should be contemporaneous” whereas here it seemed likely that “the schematics and test descriptions the Appellant provided were … prepared.. when the CRA asked the Appellant for supporting documentation,” and similarly for testing summaries (para. 139). ...