Search - 微信撤回和删除的区别 官方

Custeau, 2020 QCCA 1496-- summary under Subsection 248(10) Summary Under Tax Topics- Income Tax Act- Section 248- Subsection 248(10) s. 248(10) “in contemplation of” test appropriately applied only on a forward-looking basis where the historical transaction was purely commercial When a family small business corporation (the “Corporation”) was in financial difficulty, a Quebec regional development fund and affiliated fund (the “Funds”) agreed (with an objective of saving jobs in the region) to inject equity capital in the Corporation on terms largely dictated by them – which entailed the funds investing (in 1997 and 1998) in the common shares of the Corporation (or in shares that were converted into the common shares of the Corporation), so that the paid-up capital of the taxpayers’ shares was boosted from a nominal amount to $1.45 million due to PUC averaging. ... The excerpt from Trustco shows that this may be an alternative exercise depending on the circumstances of the case. … Copthorne … approved both approaches because each situation is an individual case. ...

Before reversing the decision below that the masters were Class 8(j) tangible capital property, and agreeing with the ARQ that they instead were eligible capital property (now Class 14.1) property, Schrager JA referenced s. 18 of the Copyright Act, which provided that “the maker of a sound recording has a copyright in the sound recording, consisting of the sole right to … [inter alia] reproduce it in any material form,” and then stated (at para. 31): There are intangible rights … as described in section 18 … which were purchased in association with the physical tapes. ... The value is found in what is recorded on the plastic or cellulose and what Respondent can do with it – i.e. make and sell good quality copies …. ...

This does not alter the fact that there was only one joint venture agreement entered into and signed by all the … joint venturers. … There was no intention on the part of the legislator to provide for the existence of more than one joint venture, nor to calculate inputs according to the participation of each of the joint venturers. ...

. … [T]he appellant … stress[ed] that in the absence of a lease between the Company and Francoeur during the years in question, one cannot speak of a "transfer of rights" from the former to the latter. ...

He went on to indicate (at para. 49) that in any event, the daughter could be considered to be “subject to tax” (or “liable for tax” to use his preferred translation, and also essentially the phrase considered in Crown Forest): … The income tax legislation … applies to all Canadian residents … because they may, in one year or another, earn business income in Quebec…. ...

Upon their completion, the taxpayer invoiced Téléglobe for $2.7 million (which he included in computing his income – but presumably with deductions for the cost of the work performed) but issued Téléglobe a credit note for the $2 million amount of the improvement allowance. ... As in … Développement Iberville … the appellant did not establish that the work was related to the specific needs of Teleglobe and, therefore, was of no use to other tenants, and that it did not add any value to the building. Finally, the appellant argues that "[i]t is not in doubt that [the purpose of the payment] was to induce Teleglobe to sign the lease and accept the obligations involved" …. ...

Burton v Commissioner of Taxation, [2019] FCAFC 141-- summary under Subsection 91(4) Summary Under Tax Topics- Income Tax Act- Section 91- Subsection 91(4) credit “in respect of” income only included the taxable ½ of capital gain The taxpayer was an Australian resident who was taxed at the 15% long-term U.S. capital gains rate on his gains on disposal of U.S. oil and gas drilling rights. ... In affirming the decision below to confirm the Commissioner’s denial of a FITO for half of the U.S. tax, Logan J stated (at para. 86): As a matter of ordinary language flowing from the text of s 770-10 … it is only the net capital gain which is … included in Mr Burton’s assessable income. … There is no contextual warrant for construing “included in” as extending to an amount which is used for computation of an amount that is included in assessable income. ...

In finding that this requirement was satisfied, Newey LJ stated (at para. 21): HMRC's case … runs counter to the ordinary meaning of the words "period of ownership". ... A purchaser would, as a matter of ordinary language, be described as "owner" only once the purchase had been completed. … Lord Walker said this on the subject in Jerome v Kelly [2004] UKHL 25 … at paragraph 32: … Neither the seller nor the buyer has unqualified beneficial ownership. ... Newey LJ further found that s. 28 of the TCGA, which provided that the disposal and acquisition of an asset under a non-conditional contract occurred at the time the contract was made, did not “dictate the conclusion that the ‘period of ownership’ of a dwelling-house for the purposes of section … 223 must run from the date of the contract under which it was bought” (para. 25). ...

He stated that "the expectation of privacy with respect to business records … is very low" and that "the information sought … is required in the context of verification activities undertaken … to determine whether the Unnamed Persons have filed their required tax returns. ...

Before reversing the decision below to confirm these reassessments, the Court of Appeal stated (at para. 13, TaxInterpretations translation): The appellant was not required to make out a prima facie case that the 7.89% rate was unreasonable but, rather, that the assumption, on which the respondent relied in assessing it, that the 10% interest rate deducted from its income for the taxation years in issue was not "reasonable in the circumstances," … was prima facie … unsound. Since the 10% rate actually used fell within what the above evidence indicated was a reasonable range, such a prima facie case had been established – so that the onus shifted to the ARQ, which had “failed to demonstrate by a preponderance of the evidence that the 10% interest rate was unreasonable within the meaning of TA section 420.” ...