Search - 屯门 安南都护府

Pierce, Hleck, Kanuka, Mitchell & Thuringer, Barristers and Solicitors, 201 Gordon Building, 2180 — 12th Avenue, REGINA, Saskatchewan. ... Jack Fraser — Your file #3768 JWK Your letter of May 16, 1968 is acknowledged. ...

Date # Warrants Purchased Purchase Price (Canadian $) 12 Apr./72 1000 $29,337.88 27 Dec./72 400 7,476.21 1972 Totals 1400 $36,814.09 9 Mar./73 2600 $29,846.09 c) on 5 April 1974 the Appellant sold all of the said warrants and received proceeds of disposition therefor in the amount of $21,444.54; d) during the period from 12 April 1972 to 5 April 1974 the shares of Loew’s Corporation were listed on the New York Stock Exchange and the warrants of Loews Corporation were listed on the American Stock Exchange; neither the shares nor the warrants of Loew’s Corporation were listed on any stock exchange in Canada in the said period; e) in assessing the Appellant for the taxation years 1972 and 1973 the Respondent assessed the Appellant for tax in the amounts of $36,814.09 and $29,846.09 respectively on the basis that the said purchases of warrants were acquisitions of non-qualified investments by the Appellant in respect of which tax equal to the cost to the Appellant of the said warrants was payable by virtue of subsection 198(1) of the Income Tax Act. f) in assessing the Appellant for the taxation year 1974 the Respondent refunded to the Appellant the amount of $21,444.54 on the basis that the said sale of the warrants was a disposition of a non-qualified investment by the Appellant in respect of which the Appellant was entitled to a refund of the tax described in sub-paragraph 1(e) herein to the extent. of the said proceeds of disposition by virtue of subsection 198(4) of the Income Tax Act. 2. ... The appellant acquired 28,650 purchase warrants in August, 1956. from Burns Brothers & Denton Limited. investment dealers, at the market price which was. 20¢ each. ...

It is a plainly worded prohibition of deductions in respect of outlays or expenses except to the extent that they were “... made or incurred by the taxpayer for the purpose of gaining or producing income from the business or property....” ...

The position of the respondent was that: —a portion of the proceeds of disposition of the shares represented a taxable deemed dividend under subsection 84(3) of the Income Tax Act’, —the appellant included in his 1977 income tax return an amount of $9,084 in respect of the taxable deemed dividend on the sale of shares; — he received a taxable deemed dividend of $90,836 in accordance with subsection 84(3) of the Income Tax Act; —the appellant is not entitled to claim any reserve with respect to the taxable deemed dividend. ...

Minister of National Revenue, [1972] CTC 2031, 72 DTC 1001 The Chairman:—The taxpayer, a resident of Willowdale, Ontario, is employed as a securities salesman by Thomson & McKinnon Inc, Brokers. ...

Taxes assessed were as follows: federal— $72,809.98; provincial — $28,229.44, together with interest in the sum of $3,171.37. ...

The following letter was filed in support of the application: March 20, 1978 Tax Review Board, Kent Professional Building, 381 Kent Street, Ottawa, Ontario Dear Sirs: Re: Account # TAZZM 010-001-3 Lloyd Tazzman 1974 and 1975 years Attached please find notices of objection for the above for 1974 and 1975. ...

In filing his return of income for the 1975 taxation year, the Appellant sought to deduct pursuant to Paragraph 60(c) of the Income Tax Act from his total income the sum of $5,882.49 which he calculated as follows: Cash paid to estranged spouse $2,600.00 Residence payments 2,100.00 Home insurance 100.00 Home maintenance 204.95 Utilities (hydro, gas, telephone, etc) 742.54 Car plates & insurance 135.00 $5,882.49 3. ...

Law — Analysis 4.01 Law The main provisions of the Income Tax Act are subsections 156(1), 161 (2) and 161(4). They read as follows: Sec 156 Other Individuals (1) Subject to section 156.1, every individual, other than one to whom subsection 153(2) or section 155 applies, shall pay to the Receiver General of Canada (a) on or before March 31, June 30, September 30 and December 31, respectively, in each taxation year, an amount equal to % of (i) the amount estimated by the individual to be the tax payable under this Part by him for the year, or (ii) his instalment base for the immediately preceding taxation year, and (b) on or before April 30 in the next year, the remainder of his tax as estimated under section 151. ...

In assessing the appellant for his taxation years 1976, 1977 and 1978 the respondent proceeded on the basis of the following facts, inter alia: (a) by an agreement signed on December 15, 1975, the appellant joined the partners in the partnership of Arsenault, Garneau, Villeneuve & Associés (hereinafter referred to as “the partnership”) to practise his profession of engineer and consulting engineer; (b) by an agreement having the same date of December 15, 1975, concluded between the appellant and the other partners on hand, and the company Arsenault, Garneau, Villeneuve et Associés Ltée (hereinafter referred to as “the company”) on the other, the partnership retained the services of the company “in connection with contracts which have been or shall be obtained by the partnership for engineering work”; (c) on December 15, 1975, the appellant purchased 350 shares in the company for $56,794.00, and by agreement on the same date the appellant and the other members of the partnership stated that they controlled and held between them all the issued shares in the capital stock of the company, distributed as follows: Pierre Arsenault 350 Gilles Garneau 350 Claude Villeneuve 350 Peter Coombes 150 H Albert Pageau 350 Hubert Pilon 150 Emilien Roy 150 Jean-Luc Durocher 150 Michel Moreau 150 Réal d’Anjou 150 2,300 (d) clause 5 of the agreement of December 15, 1975, mentioned in the foregoing paragraph, provides inter alia that if a party ceases to be a member of the partnership for any reason, “the shares of the company held or to be held by such party shall be offered for sale in accordance with the provisions hereof, and the other parties shall either buy them or cause them to be bought by the company”; (e) clause 6 of the said agreement provides that the price per share shall be the book value of the share, and that “the shares offered for sale may be redeemed by the company if the board of directors so decides”; (f) on August 31, 1976, the appellant ceased to be a member of the partnership, and on December 20, 1976 the board of directors authorized redemption by the company of the 350 shares held by the appellant in the company; (g) the redemption of the said shares by the company took place before March 31, 1977 for the sum of $77,010.36, $12,835.36 of which was paid to the appellant in 1977 and the balance was payable in five equal consecutive annual instalments, beginning one year after the first payment; (h) before the redemption mentioned in the foregoing paragraph, the PAID- UP CAPITAL of the company pursuant to s 89(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, SC 1970-71-72, c 63 (hereinafter referred to as the ITA), and its PAID-UP CAPITAL LIMIT pursuant to s 89(1)(e) of the ITA, amounted to $166,903.00, while the PAID-UP CAPITAL of the shares purchased was $25,398.28: (166,903 x 350): 2,300 At the hearing, counsel for the appellant did not challenge the transaction, he merely sought to interpret it so that subsection 84(3) of the Act did not apply. ... He further referred the Board to the text La Compagnie au Québec — des aspects juridiques, ed Theleme, published in 1982, at the bottom of p 12.2: A very common error is to confuse certificate and share. ...