Search - 哈尔滨到北京 公里数

...

...

This is what Jayco is asking the Court to do. … In essence, Jayco is submitting that the Minister ought to have exercised her discretion differently and not taken any collection action on the GST/HST assessed. ... This Court does not have jurisdiction to review the Minister’s exercise of that power—that jurisdiction rests with the Federal Court. … The Rules are clear that disbursements will only be awarded if they are essential to the conduct of the proceedings. … The interest was not paid by Jayco to establish that the Minister’s assessment was incorrect and therefore did not arise from the appeal filed before this Court. ... Interest paid to secure the GST/HST owing upon assessment is not of this nature. … ...

She completed the sale of all the shares to the purchaser and used ½ the proceeds to repay the note. ... That said, the sale of ½ of the taxpayer’s shares to her for a note clearly was a tax avoidance transaction (para. 53): Ms. ... Favreau J went on to find that there was an abuse under s. 245(4), so that the s. 245(2) assessment of the taxpayer to include all (rather than ½) of the taxable capital gains in his hands was confirmed. ...

II, s. 9 (which requires inter alia that the contract lenses “are, or are to be, supplied under the authority of a prescription prepared … by [a qualified practitioner] for the treatment or correction of a defect of vision,” Smith J stated (at para. 69, TaxInterpretations translation): [I]t is not sufficient … that the appellant's website inform the consumer of the need for a valid prescription. The appellant must itself obtain a copy of the prescription … from which it can be concluded that the consumer has a prescription "for the treatment or correction of a defect of vision." Before so concluding, and after having referred to s. 286(1), he stated (at paras. 65-66): This Court has repeatedly pronounced on the obligation to maintain records in relation to zero-rated supplies …. ...

On the day of the closing of the sale, about two months later, the following transactions occurred: He donated ½ of his shares, having an FMV of approximately $1M, to his wife, with s. 73(1) applying for this to occur on a rollover basis. ... She completed the sale of all the shares to the purchaser and used ½ the proceeds to repay the note. ... Accordingly, the s. 245(2) assessment of the taxpayer to include all (rather than ½) of the taxable capital gains in his hands was confirmed. ...

In finding that the recipient of the supply of the property was Mayling, so that the appellant was liable for failure to have charged HST given Mayling’s unregistered status, Bocock J stated (at paras 32, 34, 36-37): … Factually, neither of the purported agent or bare trustee nor principal or Beneficial Owner existed when the APS was executed. … At law, Mayling was not relieved of its obligations under the APS by any identifiable document.... …[C]ases where a bare trust or agency have been found to exist, and are interpreted by CRA to exist, require some documentary or evidential disclosure of the various parties to the supplier at the time of supply. … …[N]one of…the alleged Beneficial Owners and principals, nor 840 Holdings, the alleged trustee or agent, executed the APS, was described in such capacity to the Appellant or was reliably described in other contemporaneous collateral documents as such. … Bocock J concluded (at para 40): Mayling remained the purchaser until closing and, as such, obligated to pay the consideration. … Therefore both the ETA and APS required the Appellant to collect and remit the HST. ...

This is what Jayco is asking the Court to do. … In essence, Jayco is submitting that the Minister ought to have exercised her discretion differently and not taken any collection action on the GST/HST assessed. Had she done so, Jayco would not have had to obtain the letter of credit and pay interest on it. … The Minister has the power to take collection actions against a person under the ETA once a person is assessed and unpaid amounts of tax remain. This Court does not have jurisdiction to review the Minister’s exercise of that power—that jurisdiction rests with the Federal Court. … The Rules are clear that disbursements will only be awarded if they are essential to the conduct of the proceedings. … The interest was not paid by Jayco to establish that the Minister’s assessment was incorrect and therefore did not arise from the appeal filed before this Court. ...

Thompson, who wholly-owned it) refused to answer questions posed on his examination for discovery, that were designed to elicit the reason or purpose for which various transactions were engaged in by the appellant and other companies in the group, on the grounds that he and the appellant did “not have any information (including information about reasons, purposes, intention or understanding) that pertains to the … Questions and that could be provided to the Respondent without disclosing information that is protected by solicitor-client privilege.” ... This could occur where the taxpayer puts its state of mind in issue, having received legal advice to help form that state of mind. … Merely forming a view, after receiving legal advice, and then implementing a transaction does not constitute reliance on that advice …. Based on my review of the pleadings and the relevant portions of the Transcript …I do not think that the Appellant has placed its reliance on legal advice in issue as part of the position that it will take at trial. … Although I will not issue an order that would require the Appellant, in response to any of the Disputed Questions, to disclose information that is subject to solicitor-client privilege, I will note that … unless the Appellant furnishes the information in writing to the Respondent no later than ten days after this Appeal is set down for trial, the Appellant will require leave of the trial judge [under Rule 96)1)], in order to introduce that information at trial. ...

“Once the RV was turned over to JET, JET became the agent of the Canadian dealer and became responsible for any damages occurring to the RV while in its possession pursuant to the provisions of the US Transportation Code dealing with the Bill of Lading ” (para. 105). ... No. 572, that: … [I]f certain conditions are present, there may be a symbolical delivery which divests the seller’s possession …. ... A statement in the Dealership Sale Service Agreements that neither party was “the agent … of the other for any reason” had “to be interpreted in its context” (para. 116) and, in fact, Jayco acted on the dealers’ behalf in arranging delivery. ...