Search - 报销 发票日期 消费日期不一致

In this regard, he stated (at paras. 49, 53): While the permissive word “peut” (“may”) and the imperative word “shall” seem irreconcilable …, there is no discrepancy in this case. Both versions of subsection 118.1(11) compel the Minister to assess or reassess in order to give effect to a certificate or a court decision confirming or varying the certified fair market value. … [T]he use of the word “peut” in the French version illustrates how “an official who is permitted to do a thing may, in addition, be obliged to do it” (Ruth Sullivan, Sullivan on the Construction of Statutes …). … Although the English text does not use the word “may” to denote the fact that the Minister is allowed to assess out of time, the statutory permission is equally present because the obligation to assess out of time necessarily brings with it the right to do so. So read, both texts require the Minister to abide by a fair market value certificate or the final court decision confirming it or varying it, and for that purpose, allow the Minister to assess out of time. … Words and Phrases may ...

Paletta, 2022 FCA 86-- summary under Business Summary Under Tax Topics- Income Tax Act- Section 248- Subsection 248(1)- Business common law concept of business informs the s. 248(1) definition Before going on to find that the taxpayer’s activity of FX straddle trading, which had the appearance of commerciality but was not engaged in for profit, was not a business, and after noting (at para. 34) “the long accepted common law definition of business which simply requires that the activity be undertaken in the pursuit of profit,” Noël C.J. stated (at para. 38): … Stewart … made it clear that the test being devised was consistent with the traditional common law definition of “business”. ... As in such circumstances, the private law-- the common law on the facts of Stewart-- fills the gap, the Supreme Court explained that the Stewart test gave effect to the common law definition of “business” (Stewart, para. 51) …. ...

He borrowed $695 million from CIBC so as to generate an interest deduction for the period prior to the departure, with the borrowed money simultaneously being reinvested with CIBC – but with the return thereon not being taxable to him prior to his departure due to the reinvestment occurring “through” intermediate Caymans companies who issued preferred shares rather than debt to him. ... The appellant suggests that his matters were “effectively” held in abeyance pending Grant, but offers no evidence that any such agreement existed or, more importantly, would have the effect of suspending interest. … Telfer … stated that a taxpayer who knowingly fails to pay a tax debt pending a decision in a related case “normally cannot complain that they should not have to pay interest” ….. ...

., to a Luxembourg s.à r.l (Alta Luxembourg – which, in turn, they held through an Alberta partnership). ... In the Court of Appeal, the Crown conceded that the gain of Alta Luxembourg was exempted from Canadian capital gains tax by virtue of the exclusion in Art. 13(4) of the Canada-Luxembourg Treaty which provided that the Alta Canada shares were not deemed immovable property (and thus not subject to Canadian capital gains tax) on the basis that the exploration licences were property of Alta Canada “in which the business of the company … was carried on,” but maintained its unsuccessful position in the Tax Court that the exemption of the gain constituted an abuse of the Treaty. ... He concluded (at para. 80): I agree with … MIL … that the object, spirit and purpose of the relevant provisions of the Luxembourg Convention is reflected in the words as chosen by Canada and Luxembourg. ...

In finding that the taxpayer’s statement of claim should be struck, Woods JA applied the principle that even “if … a party is a stranger to a transaction, the transaction must still be described with sufficient detail that the other party can identify it” (para. 80) and noted, regarding the taxpayer’s allegation that the Audit Division shared information gathered from the requirement letters with criminal investigators, that the “pleading does not link the alleged sharing of information to any particular criminal investigation” (para. 83). Furthermore, although a general statement of the Minister suggested “that audits may precede criminal investigations … this is permitted in Jarvis ” (para. 72). ...

…[T]hat procedure … is wholly inconsistent with the asserted implied term. ... The concept of delivery … is to be interpreted in the same manner as …delivery in the applicable sales of goods legislation (Jayco …). ...

Canada, 2018 FCA 112-- summary under Ordinary Meaning Summary Under Tax Topics- Statutory Interpretation- Ordinary Meaning supposed purpose cannot supplant clear language In confirming the finding below that the taxpayer, who came to Canada as a refugee claimant, was not entitled to the Canada child tax benefit, De Montigny JA stated (at para. 17): [T]his Court reiterated in …. Quinco … that where a provision is clear and unambiguous, its words must simply be applied; one cannot rely on a “supposed purpose” to “supplant” clear language. ...

Canada, 2019 FCA 299-- summary under Stare Decisis Summary Under Tax Topics- General Concepts- Stare Decisis consent judgments had no precedential value In rejecting arguments that the Federal Court of Appeal should not follow its earlier decision in Maréchaux, Noël CJ stated (at para 52): … [T]his Court will not overrule a prior decision unless it can be shown that in rendering it, the Court overlooked binding precedents or ignored relevant statutory authority…. ... Noël CJ also stated (at para 61): … [T]he four Consent Judgments signed by the Minister involving other participants in the [subject leveraged donation] Program for taxation years subsequent to the enactment of subsections 248(30)-(32)… are of no assistance to the appellants. ...

In commenting on the third ground, he stated (at paras. 21, 23): [T]he Assistant Commissioner … stated that “the legislative intent [is] that only purchasers who are not consumers can take possession of goods in Canada for export on a zero-rated basis.” ... He also implicitly acknowledged the general intent noted in Montecristo … that GST/HST should be limited to consumption within Canada. The next sentence of the Assistant Commissioner’s analysis is equally reasonable in view of the more particular intent reflected in the detailed conditions for zero-rating: “Goods purchased by non-resident consumers are only intended to be zero-rated if they are shipped to a destination outside Canada, or they are sent by mail or courier to an address outside Canada.” … The Assistant Commissioner concluded reasonably that the predicament in which Escape Trailer found itself (being liable for HST amounts that were not collected from customers) was caused not by any unintended results of the legislation, but rather by its failure to comply with any of the detailed conditions for zero-rating. ...

In finding that the taxpayer’s statement of claim should be struck, Woods JA applied the principle that even “if … a party is a stranger to a transaction, the transaction must still be described with sufficient detail that the other party can identify it” (para. 80) and noted, regarding the taxpayer’s allegation (para. 76) that the Audit Division shared information gathered from the requirement letters with criminal investigators, that “the statement of claim did not identify with particularity any criminal investigation into the Respondent” (para. 82) and that the “pleading does not link the alleged sharing of information to any particular criminal investigation” (para. 83). Furthermore, although a general statement of the Minister suggested “that audits may precede criminal investigations … this is permitted in Jarvis ” (para. 72). ...