Search - 报销 发票日期 消费日期不一致

Hiram Walker & Sons Ltd. v. The Town of Walkerville, (1933) S.C.R. 247. ... Barclay Curle & Co, Ltd. [2] was cited to illustrate the above distinction. ... Solicitors for the appellant: Lawson, Lawson, Lundell, Lawson & McIntosh, Vancouver. ...

On June 7th, 1928, the appellant sent the Minister of National Revenue its cheque for $200,000 with the following letter: " " Walkerville Brewery Limited Walkerville, Ontario June 7, 1928. ... Euler when l was present. ‘ ‘ i While the exact date of the interview with the Minister is not given, it was admittedly earlier than June 7th, 1928, when the payment of $200,000 was made. ... He was in no way personally concerned in the matter but was present, as he says, " " more or less for the purpose of introducing the parties.” ...

Section 56(1)(b) ITA does not infringe the equality rights guaranteed by s. 15(1)   of the Charter  .       ... The fact that some isolated page 637 b s. 15(1)   Charter        Section 56(1)(b) cannot be saved under s. 1   of the Charter  . ... Statutes and Regulations Cited Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms  , ss. 1  , 15  . ...

Subsection 40 of Section 2 of the Insurance Act reads: — “MUTUAL INSURANCE. ... Subsection 1 of Section 3 of the Income War Tax Act, in so far as it affects the present matter, reads:— ‘ ‘ For the purposes of this Act 1 income ’ means the annual net profit or gain.... being profits from a trade or commercial or financial or other business or calling.... and shall include the interest, dividends or profits directly or indirectly received from money and interest upon any security or without security or from stocks or from any other investment, and whether such gains or profits are divided or distributed or not. ’ ’ The question is whether the surplus resulting from the amounts received from premiums paid in cash at the time the insurance is effected and from assessments being in excess of that required for the company’s operations is a profit or gain. ... Is it possible to say that this is an association for the purpose of profit, or that it has made any profit “.? ...

Grace, Smith & Company, [1912] A.C. 716; Lockhart v. Canadian Pacific Railway Company, [1941] S.C.R. 278; W. ... [Page 190] In order to invoke the provisions of s. 23(1) of the Customs Act under the circumstances disclosed in this case, it is "default of … entry … or payment of duty" by Levy Brothers which must be shown. ... Grace, Smith & Company 3, and by this Court in Lockhart v. Canadian Pacific Railway Company 4, per Duff C.J., W. ...

He relies on ss. 3 and 58, the relevant portions of which should now be cited: 3. (1) There shall be included in computing the aggregate net value of the property passing on the death of a person the value of all property, wherever situated, passing on the death of such person, including, without restricting the generality of the foregoing, (a) all property of which the deceased was, immediately prior to his death, competent to dispose; (2) For the purposes of this section, (a) a person shall be deemed to have been competent to dispose of any property if he had such an estate or interest therein or such general power as would, if he were sui juris, have enabled him to dispose of that property; … (e) notwithstanding anything in this section, the expression in paragraph (a) of subsection (1) ‘property of which the deceased was, immediately prior to his death, competent to dispose’ does not include the share of the spouse of the deceased in any community of property that existed between the deceased and such spouse immediately prior to his death. 58. (1) In this Act, (a) … (i) “general power” includes any power or authority enabling the donee or other holder thereof to appoint, appropriate or dispose of property as he sees fit, whether exercisable by instrument inter vivos or by will, or both, but does not include any power exercisable in a fiduciary capacity under a disposition not made by him, or exercisable as a mortgagee; [Page 816] Appellant’s argument is that immediately before his death François Faure was competent to dispose of half of the community of acquests, and as a result the word “passing” must be more broadly interpreted, and that the fact that Francois Faure, under art. 1292 C.C., was bound to obtain the consent of his wife with respect to certain dispositions is not an obstacle to such an interpretation. ... Solicitors for the respondents: Martineau, Walker, Allison, Beaulieu, Mackell & Clermont, Montreal ...   [1] [1975] C.T.C. 136. [2] [1973] F.C. 783. [3] [1962] S.C.R. 65. [4] [1968] S.C.R. 505. ...

He then went on to say this (at p. 265): Nor do I think that the dicta of LORD ESHER, M.R., and FRY, L.J., can be relied on as laying down that in no circumstances can the court command production of documents from any person other than a witness in the case. … The power to command the production of documents is quite general, and the Act does not say that they can be required to be produced only by a witness giving oral evidence. ... It reads as follows: 178.16 … (3.1) A private communication that has been intercepted and that is admissible as evidence may be admitted in any criminal proceeding or in any civil proceeding or other matter whatever respecting which the Parliament of Canada has jurisdiction, whether or not the criminal proceeding or the civil proceeding or other matter relates to the offence specified in the authorization pursuant to which the communication was intercepted. ... Solicitors for the applicant: Field & Field, Edmonton. Solicitors for the respondents: Macdonald, Spitz, Edmonton.   ...

., relying on London & Thames Haven Oil Wharves Ltd. v. Attwooll (Inspector of Taxes) (1966), [1967] 2 All E.R. 124 (Eng. ... In Saint John Dry Dock & Shipbuilding Co. v. Minister of National Revenue, [1944] Ex. ... After a review of the relevant case law, including Charles Brown & Co. v. ...

Williamson & Sons Ltd., [1896] 2 Q.B. 353; Boyce v. Paddington Borough Council, [1903] 1 Ch. 109; Electrical Development Co. of Ontario v. ... Williamson & Sons Ltd. [16]; Boyce v. Paddington Borough Council [17]. ...   [1] [1972] 2 O.R. 340. [2] [1972] 1 O.R. 86. [3] [1972] 2 O.R. 340. [4] [1924] S.C.R. 331. [5] [1911] 1 K.B. 410, and [1912] 1 Ch. 158. [6] [1911] 1 K.B. 410. [7] (1908), 39 S.C.R. 657. [8] (1853), 4 Gr. 170. [9] (1907), 39 S.C.R. 657. [10] [1924] S.C.R. 331. [11] [1911] 1 K.B.410. [12] [1912] 1 Ch. 158. [13] [1973] 1 All E.R.689. [14] [1902] A.C. 165. [15] (1887), 36 Ch. 593. [16] [1896] 2 Q.B. 353. [17] [1903] 1 Ch. 109. [18] [1919] A.C. 687. [19] [1962] S.C.R. 642. [20] (1946), 71 C.L.R.237. [21] (1923), 262 U.S. 447. [22] (1972), 5 N.B.R. (2d) 653. [23] (1907), 39 S.C.R. 657. [24] (1853), 4 Gr. 170. [25] (1853), 4 Gr. 489 aff’d. (1856), 6 Gr. 1 aff’d (1858), 11 Moo. ...

He found support for this position in the Court's decision in West Kootenay Power & Light Co. v. ... She found at p. 244 that the trial judge erred in applying to the case at bar the interpretation in Symes of Wilson J.'s rejection in Mattabi Mines, supra, of “both the need for a causal connection between a particular expenditure and a particular receipt, and the suggestion that a receipt must arise in the same year as an expenditure is incurred,” as Symes was not concerned with the timing of a deduction, which was the only issue in the case at bar. 23 Desjardins J.A. turned next to the cases relied upon by the Minister in support of the proposition that where there are two methods acceptable both under G.A.A.P. and for tax purposes, the court will prefer the one that results in a “truer picture” of the taxpayer's profit, including West Kootenay, supra, Maritime Telegraph & Telephone Co. v. ... Gardner Mountain & D'Ambrumenil Ltd. (1947), 29 T.C. 69 (U.K. ...