Search - 哈尔滨到北京 公里数

The principle was described in James Richardson & Sons, Ltd. v. Minister of National Revenue, [1984] 1 S.C.R. 614, 84 D.T.C. 6325 at 6329, where the Court referred to the English decision of Pretty v. ...

. … As a result, the loss realized by CIBC on the redemption of shares is deemed to be nil and, therefore, there is no loss that could have been deemed to be a capital loss under subsection 39(2) of the ITA. ...

...

...

...

Its jurisdiction does not extend to judicial review of decisions of the Minister under discretionary relief provisions of the Act …. ... The problem with this reasoning is that this is exactly what the taxpayer relief provisions are intended to do — enable the Minister to provide relief from strict filing requirements. ... … …I would remit [the s. 220(3) matter] to the Minister for full consideration and decision. … ...

In confirming that the ecological gift instead was made in 2008 when the gifted property was disposed of, Noël CJ stated (at paras 39, 42, 44): [W]hen property is gifted … the disposition takes place when ownership of the gifted property is transferred from the donor to the donee … The question as to when a “gift was made” for purposes of paragraph 110.1(1)(d) is fully answered by paragraph 38(a.2). That paragraph provides, by referring specifically to ecological gifts, that “the disposition is the making of a gift” …. This is consistent with the wording used in subparagraph 69(1)(b)(ii) which speaks of a disposition “by way of gift inter vivos ”…. ...

In dismissing the Crown’s appeal, Woods JA stated (at paras. 35, 37-39, and 42): … Parliament’s intent must override O.A. Brown where legislative intent is clear as it is in the provisions applicable in this case. … The particular circumstances of this case clearly call into question the application of O.A. ... Further, the property has only one use – to move teeth or jaws. It is also relevant that the appliances provided to patients are almost invariably accompanied by orthodontic services. … [T]he listing of orthodontic appliances in Schedule VI would have very limited application if the Crown’s position were correct. ...

In rejecting the second submission, Pelletier JA stated (at paras. 30-32): … Judicial comity is a doctrine which seeks to promote uniformity and predictability in the law. ... As a result, the use of the expression “horizontal stare decisis ” to refer to judicial comity is misleading precisely because judicial comity is not enforced by courts of appeal while stare decisis is. As a result, the Federal Court committed no legal error when it declined to follow the Lin case. … The Federal Court came to its own conclusion that the necessary criteria had been satisfied by reference to the documents themselves. ...

She stated (at paras. 54, 56 and 62): The Impugned Provisions … are similar to information automatically provided to the CRA for regulatory purposes (e.g., T4s by employers, T5s by financial institutions, and taxpayers’ annual disclosure of foreign holdings). … It is difficult to see how a seizure contemplated by the Impugned Provisions significantly intrudes into privacy interests, as the appellants appear to suggest. Accordingly, I see no reason in this case to revisit the comment in Jarvis that the entire ITA is a regulatory statute. … Quite simply, the Impugned Provisions are an example of international cooperation in the administration of income tax laws. … ...