Search - 微信撤回和删除的区别 官方

Before allowing the taxpayers appeal, Yuan J stated (at para. 41): I have difficulty imagining what better evidence the CRA could reasonably expect an applicant to produce as proof of filing where the application was submitted by regular mail …. ...

. … The Appellant continued to work outside the home after marrying CC and had no special training qualifying her to care for CC in a manner beyond the level of care that might be expected of any spouse. ...

He concluded (at para. 27): This is the type of situation … wherein a shareholder receives draws on the shareholder loan account throughout the year and then a dividend determination is made at some point for the year. ...

II, s. 9, Smith J stated (at para. 69, TaxInterpretations translation): [I]t is not sufficient … that the appellant's website inform the consumer of the need for a valid prescription. ...

The documents framed the optional term extension “as a separate pursuit … separate and distinct from the electricity supply contract” (para. 93). ...

. … [T]here is not a single [Canadian] case in which the word "property" has been held to include a right that is not or does not entail an exclusive and legally enforceable claim. ...

The Queen, 78 DTC 6426, [1978] CTC 628 (FCTD)-- summary under Subsection 10(2) Summary Under Tax Topics- Income Tax Act- Section 10- Subsection 10(2) taxpayer permitted to deduct as part of opening inventory the depreciation previously incorrectly included ion the previous year's closing inventory Rather than deducting in full the annual depreciation on its production assets, the taxpayer (using “absorption costing”) included a portion of such annual depreciation in its closing inventory for each year – with the closing inventory amount, including such embedded depreciation, being deducted in computing its cost of goods for the following year. ...

Since section 37 does exist, however, they are also SR & ED expenditures and are deductible as such and are entitled to whatever beneficial treatment is accorded to them by section 37. ...

In finding that the appellant was making taxable supplies, D’Arcy J first stated (at para. 88) that it was “providing something,” which was “the service of collecting, recycling and/or safely disposing of the MHS Waste (the “Recycling Services”),” and that (para. 89) it “provide[d] the Recycling Services to the persons who physically possessed the MHS Waste prior to its collection by the Appellant and to the MHSW Stewards, who … had a statutory obligation to incur the cost of collecting and recycling the MHS Waste.” ...

Spiro J further stated (at para. 22): The … fact is that none of the $8,000 support amount payable by Dr. ...