Search - 报销 发票日期 消费日期不一致

Results 671 - 680 of 793 for 报销 发票日期 消费日期不一致
SCC

Canada Safeway Ltd. V. Minister of National Revenue, 57 DTC 1239, [1957] CTC 335, [1957] S.C.R. 717

Where general expenses are incurred to earn both taxable and non-taxable income the Minister shall have power to apportion the said expenses. It has been shown that in 1947 the appellant received $240,000 as dividends from Macdonalds, while it paid as interest on its debentures the sum of $44,876.72; and that in 1948 it received $610,000 in dividends from Macdonalds and paid, as interest on its debentures, $97,500. ... (ce) an amount paid in the year or payable in respect of the year (depending upon the method regularly followed by the taxpayer in computing his income), pursuant to a legal obligation to pay interest on (i) borrowed money used for the purpose of earning income from a business or property (other than property the income from which would be exempt), or (ii) an amount payable for property acquired for the purpose of gaining or producing income therefrom or for the purpose of gaining or producing income from a business (other than property the income from which would be exempt), or a reasonable amount in respect thereof, whichever is the lesser. The language in (i) ‘‘used for the purpose of earning income from a business’’ corresponds with that of Section 5(1) (b) of the repealed Act and to what has been said on the latter there is nothing to be added: the business of the subsidiary is not that of the company. The word " property” is introduced in paragraphs (i) and (i) but I cannot see that it can help the appellant; the language "‘borrowed money used for the purpose of earning income from... property (other than property the income from which is exempt)” in (i) means the income produced by the exploitation of the property itself. ...
SCC

Minister of National Revenue v. Allarco Developments LTD (Formerly Paris Investments Ltd), [1972] CTC 172, 72 DTC 6154

THE COURT: Well, why don’t we instead of doing that, why not make the finding that is against you and refer the matter back for reassessment? ... It is completely THE COURT: You were in the case where we worked that out with reference to trading the timber limit? ... It may well be acceptable to adopt a “cash basis” ie, taking into account for each year any cash receipts and cash expenditures in the year for one business and equally acceptable to adopt, for a very similar business, some quite sophisticated so-called ‘‘accrual basis”. ...
SCC

Alworth v. Minister of Finance, [1978] 1 SCR 447

. 16. Every person who is required by section 7 to make a return of income shall, to the extent of the property or business that he is administering, managing, winding up, [Page 455] or otherwise controlling or dealing with, pay any tax and interest and penalties assessed and levied with respect to such income before making any distribution of such property or business. 17. ... Solicitors for the appellants: Davis & Co., Vancouver. Solicitors for the respondent: Harman & Co., Victoria ...   [1] [1976] 4 W.W.R. 701. [2] [1942] S.C.R. 435. [3] [1949] A.C. 36. [4] [1933] A.C. 710. ...
SCC

Minister of National Revenue v. Sedgwick, 63 DTC 1378, [1963] CTC 571, [1964] S.C.R. 177

In the schedule attached to the said income tax return there w as shown in the recapitulation of income an item which read ‘‘ Purcell invest. account, $32,000.00’’ and written opposite the words ‘Purcell investment account’’ ar the words ‘‘T.20 in file of Jack Purcell”. ... And at p. 693: (2) the sum of £1,500 was not a share of those profits but the price or consideration paid by the remaining partners for a discharge on the part of the retiring partner to participate in them. Lord Blackburn said at p. 697: “The fair construction of the agreement does not appear to me to provide any justification for treating this sum as a charge upon the profits. ... J. said, at p. 29: It seems to me that it is a very clear case. During the year in question considerable profits accrued, to which, when they had been ascertained, the present respondent would have been entitled. ...
SCC

Alaska Trainship Corporation et al. v. Pacific Pilotage Authority, [1981] 1 SCR 261

Pacific Pilotage Authority, [1981] 1 S.C.R. 261 Date: 1981-03-19 Alaska Trainship Corporation and the Ship Alaska Appellants; and The Pacific Pilotage Authority Respondent; and The Ship “S.S. ... Solicitors for the appellants: Hogarth, Oliver, Hughes &, New Westminster. ...   [1] [1980] 2 F.C. 54; (1979), 104 D.L.R. (3d) 364; (1979), 28 N.R. 451. [2] [1934] O. ...
SCC

Her Majesty the Queen v. Premier Mouton Products Inc., [1961] CTC 160, [1961] DTC 1105

., [1961] CTC 160, [1961] DTC 1105 '. TASCHEREAU, J.:—During the relevant periods, the respondent was engaged in the processing of raw sheepskin which it transformed into finished mouton skins and shearling. ... & W. 633 at pages 646 and 650; Knutson v. Bourkes Syndicate, [1941] S.C.R. 419; The Municipality of the City and County of St. ... It was an influence which took away the voluntary character from the payment and yet which could not be ranked with * crainte et violence’. ...
SCC

Minister of Justice (Can.) v. Borowski, [1981] 2 SCR 575

ON APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF APPEAL FOR SASKATCHEWAN Courts Standing Respondent seeking declara­tion that abortion provisions of Criminal Code violating Canadian Bill of Rights and therefore invalid Respondent's only interest that of concerned citizen Whether respondent should be given standing Crimi­nal Code. ... C-34, s. 251(4),(5),(6) Canadian Bill of Rights, R.S.C. 1970, Appendix III, ss. 1(a), 2(e), (g). ... Solicitors for the respondent: Shumiatcher, Findlay & Newfeld, Regina. ...
SCC

Spencer Bros. v. The King, (1907) 39 SCR 12

Customs Act— Importation of cattle Smuggling—Clandestinely introducing cattle into Canada—Claim for return of deposit made to secure release of cattle seized—Evidence, APPEAL from the judgment of the Exchequer Court of Canada [1] by which the appellants' petition of right was refused with costs. ...
SCC

Manning Timber Products Limited v. The Minister of National Revenue, [1952] CTC 206, [1952] DTC 1148

Moreover, in the French version of Section 3, which must be read with the English one (Authors & Publishers v. ...
SCC

Time Motors Limited v. Minister of National Revenue, 69 DTC 5149, [1969] CTC 190, [1969] S.C.R. 501

It should be noted that Viscount Dunedin’s dictum in May & Butcher v. The King (Feb. 22, 1929, reported [1934] 2 K.B. 17): To be a good contract there must be a concluded bargain, and a concluded contract is one which settles everything that is necessary to be settled and leaves nothing to be settled by agreement between the parties. was explained in a later decision of the House of Lords, Hillas & Co. v. ...

Pages