Search - 报销 发票日期 消费日期不一致

[I]t is not just that I find the purpose, agreement and distribution was to more easily and inexpensively distribute the money to those with rightful claims to it, in this case CRA would be in absolutely no different position with respect to the Corporation’s unpaid taxes then had the Corporation not distributed the money to the Appellant first, but had itself directly made the identical distributions to the patients of their ‘in trust’ amounts and to the other legitimate suppliers, debts and creditors of the Corporation …. I do not accept that it was the intention of Parliament or … Livingston to have section 160 apply in circumstances where CRA not only wasn’t but could never be … in any different position whatsoever as a result of the transfer. ...

Boyle J concluded (at para 40): … I am satisfied that the appropriate contribution from the Respondent to Univar’s legal fees in this appeal is $300,000. ... In recognition of some inherent duplication and inefficiencies …, I am not allowing anything for the other two associates who each had recorded less than 5% of the total time. ... These, in addition to (a), (b) and (e) considerations, all favour a higher award of costs on this costs motion. … ...

Smith J indicated (at para. 522) that: [T]he T3GR Return was the prescribed form intended by CRA to meet the filing requirements of RRSP trustees pursuant to paragraph 150(1)(c) and subsection 207.2(1) of the Act and section 204 of the Regulations and … it was intended as a streamlined process for the reporting of group RRSPs involving hundreds of thousands of plans under one specimen plan. Smith J noted (at para. 523) that the T3GR form “specified that ‘to report taxable income (…) trustees must complete a T3 … Return’,” and found (at para. 525) that “the T3GR Returns were not intended to override a trustee’s other reporting obligations arising from the Act, notably the obligation to file a T3 Return pursuant to paragraph 150(1)(c) or to report taxable income arising from subsection 146(10.1),” and (at para. 533) that the assessments made by CRA based on the T3GR returns were made “only in connection with the taxable plans and not in connection with the non-taxable plans that were listed for information purposes only, including the RRSP Trust.” ...

In finding that the base payments made in its 1999 to 2002 taxation years did not satisfy the requirement under s. 18(1)(a) of having been incurred for the purpose of producing income from the taxpayer’s business, Owen J stated (at para. 40) that an “expenditure of the income that has been determined for a taxation period cannot be incurred as part of the process of earning that income” and that it should be considered in this regard “that the base payment only arises after the conclusion of the producer’s income earning process in respect of potash subject to the base payment tax” (para. 66) given that “[t]o compute the amount of a base payment for a year, a producer must first compute its profits for that year” (para. 64) and that “Liability for a base payment will exist only in respect of potash that has been “sold or otherwise disposed of” by a producer … [i.e.,] potash … [that] is no longer capable of producing income for the producer” (para. 65). ... The Saskatchewan legislature simply chose in the case of the base payment to substitute quantity of potash as a proxy for income to ensure that a minimum amount of tax would be collected in respect of such potash even if the producer did not have profits for the year …. ...

If the Reply were to stand, the scope of discoveries would be unmanageable …. ... Making repetitive pleadings (and also adding a Schedule that “did not contain any material facts as it [was] drafted with generic words – para. 108). ... The inclusion of evidence on which the Crown intended to rely (e.g., the inclusion of Schedules which had the look of working papers – para. 166). ...

. … [A] GST registrant should be entitled to determine its input tax credits on the basis of information in its possession without having to resort to hiring expensive third parties, such as valuators or, as I will discuss, engineers to measure spaces on its ships or experts to try to determine what percentage of fuel is consumed to propel a ship and what percentage is consumed to produce electricity, heat or hot water. … [A] methodology that is based on the actual use of the space used to carry on an integrated business such as the one carried on by the Appellant and that involves a detailed review of all areas of its operations is a fair and reasonable method …. ...

However, that is all it does …. There is nothing in the wording of subsection 13(31) that creates the fiction of the Limited Partnership having a year-end prior to February 1, 2005—specifically … a 12-month fictional taxation year that ended on January 31, 2005. The creation of such a fictional taxation year would require very specific wording that, at a minimum, addresses the fictional existence of the Limited Partnership during this period and the beginning and end of the fictional taxation year. … [T]he Appellant’s position defeats the purpose of the two-year rolling start rule by shortening the length of time that the Limited Partnership is required to have held the property to one completed taxation year. ...

Before concluding that the interchange fees were not zero-rated on the basis of the exclusion in VI‑IX‑1(a)(ii) for a service that “relates to (a) a debt that arises from … (ii) the lending of money that is primarily for use in Canada”, Sommerfeldt J found that: Regarding the “relates to” test, “there only needs to be ‘some connection’ between the interchange services and the debt described in the carve‑out, and the interchange services do not need to be ancillary or incidental to the debt” and the “ Slattery, Stantec and Miedzi Copper cases indicate that the phrases relating to, in relationship to, and, by extension, relates to, are to be given a wide or broad interpretation, and that a narrow view is to be avoided” (para. 54). ... “in a tax context, the word primarily generally means (among other things) principally, mainly, most importantly, or more than 50% ” (para. 107). ...

As … noted in City of Calgary, such supplies are parts or components of the single overall supply of electricity. … To paraphrase [O.A. ... Regarding a submission that Bell Canada (at para. 131) that it “could have purchased the electricity from a retailer and the transmission and distribution services from a Local Distributor,” he stated (at para. 132) that the “Court must make its decision based upon the supplies actually made ….” ...

DTI was found by Russell J to bear the costs of the diesel fuel for the trips through the use by the drivers on its behalf of « T-Chek » cards (enabling the participating Shell or other station to receive payment out of a prepaid balance made by DTI) and to bear the costs of maintenance of the trucks. ... After all, by then the diesel, substantially if not completely, would no longer even exist – having in the meantime been expended through operation of the contract truckers’ vehicles. ...