Search - 哈尔滨到北京 公里数

University Hospitals Board, 2006 ABCA 101, 384 A.R. 23, the majority of the Alberta Court of Appeal stated that: … Where a settlement offer does not contain an element of compromise, the court may nevertheless consider it to have been reasonable in the circumstances and exercise its discretion to award enhanced costs. ...

. … Because the rollover provided for in subsection 73(1) deferred this accrued gain [of $1M] in its entirety, the whole of the gain realized on the sale to [the third party] had to be attributed back to Mr. ...

. … Parliament wanted tax to be paid on the latent recapture which would otherwise go unpaid on a subsequent sale of the depreciable property by the tax-exempt purchaser. ...

The question … is whether the fact that deferred gains and recapture will never be taxed frustrates the object, spirit and purpose of subsection 97(2). ...

., 2018 FCA 30-- summary under Subsection 171(1) Summary Under Tax Topics- Income Tax Act- Section 171- Subsection 171(1) GAAR question as to determining a provision’s object was subject to correctness standard Before overturning the findings below that the transactions in question had not abused ss. 97(2) and 100(1), so that s. 245 applied, Noël CJ stated (at para. 39): The inquiry as to whether there has been an abuse gives rise to a question of mixed fact and law and is therefore subject to the standard of palpable and overriding error …. ...

Woods JA further found that while there is a “legislative objective of encouraging research and development activities … another objective is to facilitate tax administration by denying the tax incentives if the filing requirement has not been satisfied.” ...

. … [T]he CRA’s power to issue requirements under section 231.2 of the ITA to obtain information or documents that will be used for the administrative purpose of reassessing a taxpayer is not suspended by the commencement of an investigation. ...

It, therefore, seems clear that the appellant was on a fishing expedition. ­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­ ...

CRA denied the taxpayer’s request four years later for a refund of this amount on the grounds that this request had not been made within the required three-year period – and in the resulting 2014 reassessment it in fact denied some deductions/credits that had been initially allowed in its 2009 assessment. ...

. … The focus of [s. 20(1)(c)] is the current use of the borrowed money, not on the current ownership status of the property initially acquired with it. ...