Search - 微信撤回和删除的区别 官方

Bastarache JA noted (at para. 12) the respondent’s argument “that the amount of GST claimed must be incorporated in the original invoice, receipt or agreement, and it cannot be changed subsequently,” and then rejected this position, stating (at para. 13): The Act … imposes the tax on the recipient of the service, not on the supplier. It would therefore be an unreasonable interpretation of subsection 223(1) to limit the sending of a notice of the amount of GST due to documents issued at the time the supply was received. … [T]he formulation of the obligations in s. 223(1) does not reveal any intention of Parliament to impose such a restriction. ...

Before going on to confirm the finding below that it represented an abuse of process for essentially the same issue to be relitigated in the Court of Quebec respecting the availability of input tax refunds under the parallel provisions under the Quebec Sales Tax Act and Regulations, Thibault JCA stated (at para. 32, TaxInterpretations translation) that “the Court of Quebec is not bound under the … stare decisis rule by a judgment rendered by the Tax Court of Canada.” ... C.U.P.E., Local 79, [2003] 3 S.C.R. 77, 2003 SCC 63, paras. 52-53 (extract from para. 53 quoted below): … There are many circumstances in which the bar against relitigation, either through the doctrine of res judicata or that of abuse of process, would create unfairness. ...

That said … the Court is of the view the Minister should, in all equity, take steps under [such] agreements … so as to avoid this double taxation. ...

The availability to Praesto of an input tax credit for the VAT included in the Sintons invoices turned on a VAT provision providing such a credit for “VAT on the supply to him [the taxable person] of any goods or services being … goods or services used or to be used for the purpose of any business carried on or to be carried on by him.” ... CSP was seeking to put Praesto out of business as its competitor. … The FTT [below] was satisfied and found that the litigation was effectively being brought against Mr Ranson and Praesto, even though Praesto had not been joined to the proceedings. ...

In reversing the finding below that the taxpayer was carrying on a business and was entitled to deduct the claimed losses, the Court stated (at paras. 12, 16, TaxInterpretations translation): [T]he judge did not analyze the activities of the respondent in relation to the objective factors laid out … in Stewart, namely, (1) the profit and loss experience in past years; (2) the taxpayer’s training; (3) the taxpayer’s intended course of action; and (4) the capability of the venture to show a profit. … [I]t is difficult to conclude that the predominant intention of the respondent was to derive profit from the equestrian activities of his daughters and that he showed serious businesslike conduct. ...

. … In the absence of a conclusion that the promissory notes subscribed for the purchase of the … franchises constitute shams, the resulting legal effects must be respected. ...

. … [T]o succeed, the claim for punitive damages must rest upon a finding of intentional conduct and an unlawful deprivation of property. … The deprivation (if the word is appropriate) intended by the CRA was the payment of monies in satisfaction of tax assessments issued in accordance with the ITA and the Income Tax Regulations. ...

Irish Bank Resolution Corporation Ltd v Revenue and Customs, [2020] EWCA Civ 1128-- summary under Income Tax Conventions Summary Under Tax Topics- Treaties- Income Tax Conventions subsequently-added material in OECD Commentaries could be reviewed if they were not inconsistent with contemporaneous commentaries HMRC increased the UK branch profits of the Irish taxpayers’ branch banking, or home mortgages, businesses by attributing to their UK permanent establishments notional additional free capital on the basis that if they had operated as distinct and separate enterprises, they would have had a higher amount of free capital and therefore a correspondingly lower amount of borrowed capital – with the result that HMRC disallowed interest which was actually paid to third parties. ... He stated (at para. 31): Although [43]-[47] of the 2008 Commentary are new, it is clear from [7] of the Commentary that they were considered appropriate for inclusion by the OECD because they were not in conflict with earlier versions of the Commentary. … On that basis, the 2008 Commentary, although new, would be admissible as an aid to the construction of Article 8(2) of the 1976 Convention which, as I have explained, adopted the wording of Article 7(2). ...

. … It must be concluded that the question of the deduction of a portion of the withholding taxes made by the Government of Canada does not fall within the jurisdiction of the Court of Quebec …. ...

. … The purpose of providing an appeal from the assessment is to ensure to the taxpayer that it shall be correct in fact and in law. … [C]ertainly it should not be assumed, without most explicit terms, that Parliament intended that the administration and definition of a policy, which it had left to the discretion of a Minister responsible to it, should be left to the discretion of the Court, which is in no way responsible to it. ...