Search - 报销 发票日期 消费日期不一致

.: — Thiele Drywall Inc., the appellant, has appealed (Informal Procedure) assessments of income tax for its 1990 and 1991 taxation years in which the Minister of National Revenue (“Minister”) disallowed its claim for the deduction of legal expenses of $1,265 in 1990 and $32,563 in 1991 in computing its income for each of those years. ... A reported case with facts similar to those in the appeal at bar, counsel stated, is Ben Matthews & Associates Ltd. v. ... The president stated: … that the risk of collision between vessels is a normal and ordinary hazard of marine operations generally, and that, while the amount of the appellant’s liability in the present case was unusually large, there was nothing abnormal or unusual about the nature of the collision itself. ...

.: — This appeal is from an assessment for the appellant’s 1989 taxation year, and specifically for the taxation year comprising the fiscal period commencing on July 1, 1989 and ending December 31, 1989. ... The usual rule — and I see no reason why it should not apply in income tax appeals — is set out in Odgers’ Principles of Pleading and Practice, 22nd edition at page 532: The “burden of proof’ is the duty which lies on a party to establish his case. ...

By agreement, the following exhibits were entered: Exhibit A-l- Income and Expense summary of K2V2 — 1990-1994 Exhibit A-2- Income and Expense statement of K2V2 — 1995 Exhibit A-3- Statement of Business Activities of K2V2 — 1996 The appellant, James Virtue, testified he is a teacher, living in Regina, Saskatchewan, and formed a 50-50 partnership with his father-in-law, Edward Kryski, to operate K2 V2, a business involved in leasing amusement games to arcades, restaurants and other locations. ...

The reason given in the Notice of Appeal is as follows: [TRANSLATION] / am contesting the decision because I am an honest citizen and there was no ulterior motive for what I did. ... The definition of total charitable gifts in s. 118.1(1) of the Act reads as follows: “total charitable gifts’ — “total charitable gifts” of an individual for a taxation year means the total of all amounts each of which is the fair market value of a gift (other than a gift the fair market value of which is included in the total Crown gifts or the total cultural gifts of the individual for the year, or would have been so included for a preceding taxation year if this section had applied to that preceding year) made by the individual in the year or in any of the 5 immediately preceding taxation years (other than in a year for which a deduction under subsection 110(2) was claimed in computing the individual’s taxable income) to (a) a registered charity, to the extent that those amounts were (h) not deducted in computing the individual’s taxable income for a taxation year ending before 1988, and (1) not included in determining an amount that was deducted under this section in computing the individual’s tax payable under this Part for a preceding taxation year; As may be seen from reading this definition, the fair market value of the property given is an essential element of the tax credit for a gift. ... Contents of receipts — (1) Every official receipt issued by a registered organization shall contain a statement that it is an official receipt for income tax purposes and shall show clearly in such a manner that it cannot readily be altered, (a) the name and address in Canada of the organization as recorded with the Minister; (b) the registration number assigned by the Minister to the organization; (c) the serial number of the receipt; (d) the place or locality where the receipt was issued; (e) where the donation is a cash donation, the day on which or the year during which the donation was received; (e. 1) where the donation is a gift of property other than cash (i) the day on which the donation was received, (ii) a brief description of the property, and (iii) the name and address of the appraiser of the property if an appraisal is done; (f) the day on which the receipt was issued where that day differs from the day referred to in paragraph (e) or (e.1); (g) the name and address of the donor including, in the case of an individual, his first name and initial; (h) the amount that is (i) the amount of a cash donation, or (ii) where the donation is a gift of property other than cash, the amount that is the fair market value of the property at the time that the gift was made; and (i) the signature, as provided in subsection (2) or (3), of a responsible individual who has been authorized by the organization to acknowledge donations. ...

The relevant passage in that paragraph is the clause at the end of the second sentence which says, “.. of which 60 are non-liberal arts credits awarded for completion of the AMDA program”. ... : “... attendance at a university outside of Canada in a course leading to a degree ”, I think it is implicit that the degree is to be granted by the university attended. ...

The Appellant, during the years in question, was engaged in a business with his brother Jeff under the name G & H Cabinets. ... The business was incorporated at the beginning of 1990 under the name G & H Cabinets Ltd., and they continued to operate it on the basis of equal ownership. ... He later opened his own renovation business, and became a customer of G & H Cabinets Ltd. ...

On September 19, the following notation is noted “US D $15,000 @ 1.1925”. ... These transfers from the Hong Kong Corp. to the Canadian Corp. that were entered in error, under the heading “Vivien” in the Blue Book, were as follows: 1989 1990 February 28, 1989 $ 65,000.00 April 24, 1989 51,889.05 May 30, 1989 59,990.00 July 12, 1989 136,996.93 September 27, 1989 78,855.59 1989 1990 November 17, 1989 61,222.57 November 21, 1989 44.165.65 January 16, 1990 $41,989.51 TOTALS $498,119.79 $41,989.51 Vivien not only was not aware of these errors in the Blue Book, there was no way she could have known about them as she was never shown them. ... Mogan, J.T.C.C., in the Chopp decision, had said in his reasons, found at [Chopp v. /?.] ...

In order to raise Canadian funds for use in its business the Appellant in 1987 undertook a financing transaction proposed and eventually arranged for it by Goldman Sachs & Co. ... The proposal involved the same essential concepts as the New Zealand debentures and Master Forward Agreement proposed and arranged by Goldman Sachs & Co., except that the currency in which the debentures were issued was A$ and the A$ principal amount and liabilities for interest and repayment of principal were to be converted into Japanese yen and the Japanese yen proceeds and liabilities for Japanese yen were to be swapped into C$ payments. ... Nothing is more important than that the law as pronounced,... should be accepted and applied as our tradition requires; and even at the risk of that fallibility to which all judges are liable, we must maintain the complete integrity of relationship between the courts.^ [9] I Counsel for the Appellant sought to distinguish Shell on the basis that:...the Court’s conclusion regarding the deductibility of interest under paragraph 20(1)(c) was based on a finding that the transaction Shell undertook was not reasonable when compared with a “direct U.S. $ borrowing” (p. 30) which would have had a pre-tax “market rate of interest” “in the order of 9.1% per annum” (p. 3). that This specific finding allowed the Court to uphold the Minister’s reassessment of Shell on the basis that interest beyond the market rate for a direct loan of U.S. dollars would be disallowed (p. 4). that to the extent these “unique/facts found in the Shell case are not present in any other case. ...

As she observed: “And this thing has always interfered in my life and the pain is just all body pain now and it surrounds from part to part” and “I don’t know how I am going to feel like everyday of my life, and I don’t know how I can work because how will I know if I am sick, or when I am going to be sick, when I am going to — not going to be able to walk, when my head swells up. ... As was observed by Bowman T.C.J. in Radage v. /?., [6] The legislative intent appears to be to provide a modest relief to persons who fall within a relatively restricted category of markedly physically or mentally impaired persons. ... Cruickshank report dated May 2, 1994. 3 Exhibit A-2. 4 Exhibit A-1 — Disability Tax Credit Questionnaire. 5 Exhibit A-3. 6 6[1996] 3 C.T.C. 2510 (T.C.C.); approved by the Federal Court of Appeal in Johnston v. ...

The Minister of National Revenue added the $500 to the taxpayer’s income whose appeal to the Federal Court — Trial Division was allowed. ... Smith, (1892) A.C. 162, puts nothing in the pocket but merely saves the pocket) is neither remuneration as such or a benefit “of any kind whatsoever ’..... ... Returning briefly to the decision of the Federal Court — Trial Division in McNeill, Rouleau, J. went out of his way to find that the Accommodation Differential was not part of McNeill’s terms of employment. ...