Search - 报销 发票日期 消费日期不一致

However, effective January 1, 2019, the French tax on such income commenced to be imposed on a periodic basis during the year as it was earned, rather than being payable in the year following that in which it was earned – and as a result of a transitional relief measure, in 2019 the taxpayer received a credit to offset the French tax otherwise payable in arrears in 2019 on his 2018 rental income. ... Regarding “context” and “purpose” she stated (at paras. 63, 67): [T]he taxation year covered by the foreign tax credit provisions must be the same taxation year for which the taxable income and taxes payable in Canada are determined and computed. … The purpose of section 126 is to avoid double taxation where foreign source income is taxed both in Canada and abroad. ...

. … [I]nformation stored on a registrant’s computer server qualifies as supporting documentation. … I conclude that the Regulations do not set out a general requirement for the supporting documentation to be issued or signed by the supplier. ...

., not an “adventure in the nature of trade”) all businesses — without statutory exception — fall within the scope of subsection 146.2(6) of the Act, including a business of trading qualified investments. ...

. … [S]ubparagraph 56(1)(u)(ii) does have, unintentionally, a profoundly detrimental effect upon subsection 122.62(5), frustrating both purpose and proper application of that provision … as to allowing proper re-determination of CCB entitlement. ...

Before dismissing the taxpayer’s appeal, Owen J noted that Parliament had amended s. 31(1) to overrule Craig and provide that the taxpayer’s farming loss deduction will be limited under s. 31(1) for taxpayers who do not look to farming, or to farming and some subordinate source of income, for their livelihood, and stated (at para. 134): [F]or the Taxation Years and for all prior taxation years in which the Appellant carried on the farming business … [t]he Appellant looked to her medical practice for her livelihood and used the net income from her medical practice to fund her farming business, which could not survive without that funding. ... After having noted (at para. 108) that “[t]here is no evidence that calls into question … that the Appellant pursued her clearly commercial farming activity for profit”, Owen J stated (at para. 136): The result in this appeal is most unfortunate. ...

DERP2 then distributed its resource properties to DEML as a return of capital, thereby increasing the COGPE balance of DEML and reducing the ACB of DEML’s partnership interest by the FMV of the rights (higher than the value a year earlier) – but with these items effectively being approximately reversed at the partnership year end as a result of DERP2’s proceeds of the distribution of the PNG rights being allocated to its partners. ... In confirming CRA’s GAAR assessment to deny the capital loss, Russell J stated (at paras. 47, 56): Here the substantial Capital Loss was claimed where there was no economic loss or impoverishment, thus per Triad Gestco breaching the OSP [object, spirit and purpose] of the Act’s capital loss provisions, including paragraph 39(1)(b). … As the purpose of the capital loss provisions is to recognize real losses, there is clear abuse where artificial losses are deducted. ...

. … The object, spirit and purpose of the definition of CCPC is to provide a dividing line between those corporations that are taxed under the specific regime for CCPCs and those corporations that are not taxed under this regime. ... This is exactly what Parliament intended. … [T]he Appellant’s choice to be taxed as a non-CCPC did not abuse section 123.3 since Parliament only intended it to apply to a corporation’s investment income that is taxed under the regime for CCPCs. ...

. … [T]he loyalty reward points might not be redeemed for months or even years after the transaction with the non-resident merchant. In addition, there is a geographical consideration in that the Foreign Interchange Service was provided to a non-resident merchant acquirer while expenses to redeem the points are incurred by RBC in Canada. … [E]xpenses incurred by RBC in the redemption of loyalty reward points were inextricably linked and an integral component of the Appellant’s agreement to extend credit pursuant to the Cardholder Agreement. ...

In finding that Harvard Properties and NH Properties, were not dealing with each other at arm’s length, Boyle J stated (at paras. 155, 161): Given the agreement for Abacus to pay a premium to the co-owners to purchase the co-owners’ interests … the steps and the amounts in the series of transactions cannot be considered to reflect ordinary commercial dealings. … Harvard Properties, Abacus and NH Properties clearly acted together to dictate [the] Newcos’ actions from their inception and throughout the closing of this series of transactions. ...

. … Putting down a new carpet, or new laminate wood flooring … [is not] sufficiently significant to contribute to whether a building might be said to have been “gutted.” ...