Search - 屯门 安南都护府

. — refinancing of all-existing liens; — purchase of preferred shares in the Cie de Gestion Marcel Guimond Ltée (to be incorporated); this company must use the proceeds from the sale of these preferred shares to buy 50% of the common shares in Riverains Transport Inc. ...

He referred the Board to the case of Salomon v Salomon & Co Ltd, [1897] AC 22, to say that each company has its legal entity with power to contract. ... FA & AB Ltd v Lupton, [1971] 3 All ER 948 (HL) at pp 953, 954, 955, 956, 957, 958, 960, 962, 963 & 966 b) United States of America C. Gregory v Helvering (1935), 293 US 465 (USSC), per Sutherland, J at pp 468, 469 & 470 c) Canada D. ...

In Heaps & Partners (Nfld) Limited v MNR, 42 Tax ABC 278; 66 DTC 772, the Tax Appeal Board decided that payments made by the parent company to cover guaranteed loans to its subsidiary were made for producing income and were deductible. ... These loans were the only, working capital the American subsidiary ever had with the exception of the sum of $1,000 invested by Stewart & Morrison Limited for the acquisition of all of the issued share capital of its subsidiary. The money was lost and the losses were capital losses to Stewart & Morrison Limited. ...

By notice of appeal dated November 26, 1973 the appellant company appealed from the said assessments whereby the Minister of National Revenue had disallowed the deduction of the following amounts paid as interest on money borrowed from Gulfstream Insurance Limited, a company incorporated in the Bahamas, and in the relevant years a wholly-owned subsidiary of Distillers Corporation- Seagrams Limited: for 1967 $ 615,702 for 1968 $1,016,353 for 1969 § 930,747 The principal issue to be decided in this appeal is whether these interest amounts were properly disallowed by the Minister on the ground that they did not fall within the meaning of paragraph 11 (1)(c) of the Income Tax Act as it read at that time. ...

Reference may be had to Atomic Transfer Lid v MNR, 34 Tax ABC 451; CIR v Alexander Von Glehn & Co, Ltd (1919-20), 12 TC 232. ...

Act — Analysis 3.01 Act The principal provisions of the Income Tax Act, SC 1970-71-72, c 63, as amended, involved in the case at bar are 167(1) and 167(5). ...

Thus, the suggestion made by counsel for the appellant that the moneys received pursuant to the assignment are to be regarded, in effect, as instalments made in repayment of a debt as opposed to “... benefits... from or under a trust...” within the meaning of subsection 105(1) of the Income Tax Act is wrong. ...

Application of provisions of Income Tax Act — Subject to this Part and except as otherwise provided by regulation, the provisions of Divisions I and J of Part I of the Income Tax Act with respect to assessments, payment of tax, objection to assessments, payment of tax, objections to assessments and appeals, and the provisions of Part XV except section 221 of that Act apply mutatis mutandis in relation to any amount paid or payable as or on account of a contribution for a year in respect of self-employed earnings as though that amount were an amount paid or payable as or on account of tax under that Act. ...

In reassessing the appellant for his taxation year 1978 the Minister of National Revenue relied, inter alia, on the following facts: (a) during the taxation years at issue, the appellant was a salaried employee of the Centre de Services Sociaux Laurentides-Lanaudière Inc, in the capacity of social worker; (b) the Centre is a social agency, a part of the social affairs network of the province of Quebec with permanent offices in various localities in the region, at Joliette, Ste-Thérèse, St-Jêrome, Ste-Agathe and so on; the said Centre has various activities, such as youth protection, home care for the elderly, infirm, handicapped and so on; (c) labour relations between the Centre and its salaried employees are governed by a collective agreement; (d) during the taxation years at issue, the Centre asked the appellant to use his automobile, and in consideration thereof the Centre guaranteed the appellant an annual minimum mileage, and if this minimum mileage was not covered, he would be paid an additional amount for use of the automobile; (e) to further clarify subparagraph (d), during the taxation year 1978 the relevant paragraphs of the collective agreement in effect read as follows: ARTICLE 24 — TRAVEL ALLOWANCES 24.01 When an employee at the request of the employer must carry out his duties away from the establishment, he shall be deemed to be at work throughout the time used in travelling. ...

The above action by the Board is not to be regarded as agreement or disagreement with the interpretation placed on the Act as quoted by the Minister in the reply to notice of appeal, or the view allegedly expressed by the Minister’s representatives — that the excess contribution could only be withdrawn from the original RRSP. ...