Search - 报销 发票日期 消费日期不一致

See summary under s. 9 – capital gain v. profit – real estate. ...

Hershfield J found that the amended purchase agreement entailed, at most, a supply of a co-ownership interest in the property by the appellant to her friend in consideration for her friend’s guarantee – and did not result in any interest in the condo also being supplied by the builder to the friend (so that the new housing rebate was not denied to the appellant). ... Indeed, if such an agreement had been entered into to gain an unintended tax advantage, it might be seen as a wholly artificial transaction – a sham. ...

The Queen, 2017 TCC 20-- summary under Recipient Summary Under Tax Topics- Excise Tax Act- Section 123- Subsection 123(1)- Recipient named purchaser rather than alleged beneficial purchasers was the recipient of real estate sale The vendor of a commercial property signed a sale agreement with a purchaser (Mayling) who was not registered for HST purposes – but then, on closing, was directed to transfer title to a purchaser (840 Holdings), which was HST-registered. The vendor was later informed that, in fact, 840 Holdings was purchasing on behalf of two other registered companies who had acquired beneficial co-ownership interests in the property – and who self-assessed themselves for the applicable HST. ...

. … [Furthermore] … a specified person is not allowed to raise an issue in its Notice of Appeal, unless the issue was first raised in its Notice of Objection. ...

Notwithstanding a statement in the Dealership Sale Service Agreements that neither party was “the agent … of the other for any reason,” she found that, in fact, Jayco arranged for the carrier (a Jayco subsidiary) to ship the RVs to Canada on behalf of the dealers rather than of it. In this regard, she stated that a statement in the Dealership Sale Service Agreements that neither party was “the agent … of the other for any reason” had “to be interpreted in its context” (para. 116) and, in fact, Jayco acted on the dealers’ behalf in arranging delivery. ...

Smith J stated (at para 9): … [W]hile the Appellant and his spouse may have initially intended to occupy the Property as their primary place of residence, … such intention was vitiated when they entered into the lease agreement. ...

Campbell J stated (at para. 14): … The fact that the tip amount is paid to a committee and pooled with other amounts paid to the attendants before distribution does not change the nature of the payment. It remains a gratuity for services provided by the slot attendant by virtue of his employment. … ...

Consistently with the two-part test referenced in Sagaz (would the evidence, if presented have changed the result; and could the evidence have been obtained before trial with the exercise of due diligence – in that regard, notign that counsel had shown due diligence), and applying Rule 138(1) permitting a judge to reopen a hearing “for such purposes … as are just,” Sommerfeldt J allowed the invoices to be admitted after the hearing, after having given the Crown an opportunity to cross-examine the taxpayer on this evidence (which the Crown declined to do). ...

The King, 2024 TCC 125-- summary under Subsection 165(1.11) Summary Under Tax Topics- Income Tax Act- Section 165- Subsection 165(1.11) issue should be stated "reasonably" The objection of the taxpayer (RBC) referred in detail to the prior acceptance by the Minister off its input tax credit methodology as accepted for purposes of ETA 141.02(20), but did not submit that the Minister was bound by this method for its 2012 fiscal year – an argument that its counsel did not raise until the opening arguments at trial – which the Crown did not object to until the closing arguments at the end of the trial. ...

Rasouli, 2013 SCC 53 …. …[M]any of the routine services provided to residents by care aides apply nursing expertise to address particular medical concerns…[and are] of a different type than ordinary assistance with activities of daily living…. The agreed upon test was that therapeutic health care services had to be provided for at least 2.4 hours (10 percent) each calendar day. … [J]udicial interpretations…do not support the bright line 10 percent test. … The Harrison received funding during the relevant period for 2.8 hours of care per resident per day. ...