Search - 哈尔滨到北京 公里数

. … Professional fees are income and bad debts are expenses. To suggest the statutory methodology of completing each line may be ignored, provided the “effective result” of net income or taxable income is the same, makes the reporting of income non-compliant, misleading and absurd. … …In short, Mr. ... …Absent … specific evidence regarding the analysis and determination of one single 2003 bad debt claimed, the provisions of the Act have not been fulfilled and no bad debt expense may be deducted in 2003: Delle Donne v. ...

In allowing her cliams, Bocock J stated (at paras. 12 and 13): … [T]he Lawyers Insurance Association of Nova Scotia (“LIANS”). ... Moreover, there are elaborate and precise directives for files which may be scanned, may be destroyed and must be kept indefinitely. … [T]he files should be readily available where necessary and needed to mitigate legal liability arising from premature destruction, mindful of relevant limitation periods. … Both the past accrual of future record keeping services, the file storage, and the need to protect presently her insurance coverage for past legal services all represent the enduring and current provision of legal services (“continuing services”) beyond the temporal period in which the income was received: the year in which it was otherwise earned and recorded. ...

Smith J indicated that the jurisprudence was unclear whether s. 296(2.1) could be applied to require CRA to grant an offsetting credit for the NRRP rebate when it assessed Poirier to deny the new housing rebate – so that he did not foreclose the possibility that s. 296(2.1) could thereby overcome the two-year deadline. ... On the one hand, it is suggested that the off setting provisions in subsection 296(2.1) are not available when a rebate application has been dealt with under subsection 297(1) …. On the other hand, it is suggested that those provisions may be available in certain circumstances …. ...

In 2010, the Minister assessed the Henro (to include an income account gain) and 984 (to reverse the previously reported capital gain and refund the capital gains tax) on the basis that the 2003 drop-down had occurred on a non-rollover basis – but its assessment of 984 was found to be void as being statute-barred. ... However, the resulting 2015 reassessment of 984 could not be justified as valid based on s. 169(3) because the 2010 assessment was itself invalid – hence, 984 was not an appealing “taxpayer” referred to in s. 169(3) (as it was not engaged in a valid appeal procedure). This meant that the only basis for justifying the 2015 assessment of 984 was that, pursuant to s. 160.1(1), the 2010 refund represented an amount that had been “refunded to a taxpayer … in excess of the amount to which the taxpayer was entitled as a refund under this Act.” ...

The Queen, 2019 TCC 109 (Informal Procedure)-- summary under Paragraph 256(2)(a) Summary Under Tax Topics- Excise Tax Act- Section 256- Subsection 256(2)- Paragraph 256(2)(a) larger weekend country home was not their primary place of residence The taxpayer and her husband built a house, which was near Lake Huron and a 2 ½ hour drive from their Brampton rental apartment and full-time employment, doing a large portion of the work themselves on weekends beginning in 2008, with the intention to retire there. ... This last consideration regarding time spent in each location is very important and must be given great weight. … [T]he Appellant and her husband may retire approximately two years after the hearing of this matter. This would be 6 ½ years after substantial completion....[T]his is too far in the future. ...

. … [T]he parties are not the same in the Tax Court Appeal and the U.S. ... Class Action concerns a breach of U.S. securities law that allegedly occurred beginning in February of 2011. … [T]he Non-parties have not been able to refer to a specific document in this appeal whose disclosure would be in the public interest. … [T]he Non-parties’ motion is a fishing expedition…. ...

Sommerfeldt J indicated that he concurred with and was bound by Gilbert, which found that: where, for the purposes of subsection 160(1) …, the transferred property is a dividend, the amount that should be assessed under that subsection is “the amount that the Minister could have seized in the hands of the corporation had the transfer not been effected.” ... Welsh), he “would not be persuaded that the valuation opinion … represents the proper methodology for valuating the dividends paid by Global to the Trust,” In this regard, he had stated (at paras. 12-13): In essence, Mr. Welsh based his valuation on the assumption that a corporation that is about to declare, or that has just declared, a dividend may sell that stream of taxable dividend income to an arm’s-length shareholder. … …It seems to me that, if a corporation has declared a dividend, the dividend belongs to the holder of the share on which the dividend was declared, such that the corporation is not in a position to sell that dividend to someone else. ...

Before finding that such losses were on capital account, Wong J found (at paras. 24-25): … I cannot find that he was in the business of lending money during the years under appeal because the positive indicia of a business were either absent or minimally present. ... With respect to advertising and promotion, he relied on word of mouth within his Calgary community and he screened potential borrowers by taking them out for social activities. … [H]e did not keep business records in relation to his lending activity; rather, the level of recordkeeping is more consistent with a non-business (i.e. investment) situation. … I cannot find that he went about his loan activities in an orderly, businesslike way, as a business person would normally be expected to do. ...

Before so concluding, he indicated (at para. 33, 43) that CRA’s use of the Algorithm did not change the usual burden of proof that would be faced by the taxpayers at trial, stating: The Respondent … rightfully argues that “[w]hile the Algorithm (i.e. process) used by the Minister to estimate some of the suppressed transactions is within the Respondent’s knowledge, the Appellants should know and be able to prove their actual revenues and net income.” … The Appellants are under no obligation to prove that the ECAS Algorithm is deficient or unreliable. Rather, their burden of proof will be discharged by disproving the Minister’s core assumed facts through the presentation of evidence at trial to substantiate, on balance, what were the correct sales, revenue and reportable income. … [I]f convincing enough to meet the standard of proof threshold, that evidence demolishes the Minister’s core assumed facts. ...

The transitional provision indicated that the reduced rate applied inter alia “to any supply … made on or after January 1, 2008.” ... It merely requires the parties to have entered into an agreement to provide property or a service. … Further, the use of the words if any in paragraph 133(b) support a finding that for the purposes of section 133, an agreement that is conditional is still an agreement for purposes of the section. … The application of section 133 is also not contingent on the existence of the Condo Units at the time the parties entered into the Pre-November Agreements of Purchase and Sale. ...