Search - 报销 发票日期 消费日期不一致

& Mrs. Higgins instructed a certified general accountant to travel as soon as possible to Sparwood to conduct an audit. ... To extrapolate, I find the following as fact: — By February 20, 1987 the appellant was generally aware of operational shortages and the probability of non-remittances tax withholdings; —Shortly thereafter he received the request to act as director; —On February 22 he and the Higginses authorized an accounting review which commenced March 23; —He signed the consent dated February 4 around March 23; —He received the accountant's information concerning the remittance failures on March 31 and then told the accountant to go back for another check to determine where the money may have gone; —By April 15 the accountant had corresponded with Revenue Canada concerning the non-remittances; and —The appellant resigned April 16 and attended an April 29 meeting in the capacity of an investor. ...

If one accepts that loans were made in 1979 — or in any other year — to Mr. ...

Firstly, if the estate would trade their property for the apartment building / would purchase the apartment building outright from the estate for $165,000. net. ... Appeal dismissed. 1 *For an earlier and similar assessment see S & S Properties Ltd v The Queen, [1978] CTC 412; 78 DTC 6294, per Walsh, J. at 419 (DTC 6299). 2 *In Hiwako Investments Ltd v The Queen, [1978] CTC 378; 78 DTC 6281, Jackett, CJ said by way of obiter dicta at 384 (DTC 6285): “I might also add a word with reference to "secondary intention’. ...

In Ransom v MNR, [1967] CTC 346; 67 DTC 5235, Noël, J said this with reference to paragraph 6(l)(b) of the Act — it was paragraph 5(l)(b) at the time relevant to the Ransom decision — at page 359 [5243]: A reimbursement of an expense actually incurred in the course of the employment or of a loss actually incurred in the course of the employment is not an “allowance” within the meaning of the word in section 5(l)(b) as an allowance implies an amount paid in respect of some possible expense without any obligation to account. ...

On October 27, 1978, Cluff Agencies wrote the following letter to its general insurance customers: Dear Dr Leon Norris: We are pleased to announce that effective October 1st, 1978, Fred C Cluff Agencies has merged with Lillico Insurance, 1308 — Central Avenue in Prince Albert. ... In filing his income tax return for 1978 Mr Lillico included the Lillico Insurance Agency Statement of Operations for the period January 1, 1978 — Dec 31, 1978; included as an expense in computing the net loss from operations in the statement of operations was the sum of $51,127.76 for “Agency purchase”. ...

I cannot accept evidence as credible when a witness — an officer and shareholder of a corporation — says he relied on certain people to inform him of the nature of cheques he is signing on behalf of the corporation and signs the cheques without question, especially when he has just entered into a venture with a new “partner” and would be expected to at least show some prudence and control over his employees to ensure there would be no confusion, but in answer to another question he remembers precisely that a cheque paid by one corporation for the benefit of another was to have been set up as a loan between the two companies. ...

Pearson (1) Lord Wensleydale said: “ I have been long and deeply impressed with the wisdom of the rule, now I believe, universally adopted, at least in the Courts of Law in Westminster Hall, that in construing wills, and indeed statutes, and all written instruments, the grammatical and ordinary sense of the words is to be adhered to, unless that would lead to some absurdity, or some repugnance or inconsistency with the rest of the instrument, in which case the grammatical and ordinary sense of the words may be modified, so as to avoid that absurdity and inconsistency, but no farther.” ... In my opinion, the rule has always been this: — if the words of an Act admit of two interpretations, then they are not clear; and if one interpretation leads to an absurdity, and the other does not, the Court will conclude that the legislature did not intend to lead to an absurdity, and will adopt the other interpretation.” ...

And the Appellant has marked with an ‘x‘ the following answer: “You are a resident of another country who will be temporarily living in Canada for / days”. ... I lost in excess of $150,000 + loss in currency depreciation in Canada since then. ...

.: 1 Theodore Spruyt and Maria Spruyt, who are married to each other, have appealed income tax assessments in which the Minister of National Revenue (“Minister”) assessed each of them penalties pursuant to subsection 163(2) of the Income Tax Act (“ Act ”). ...

Pillo, testified — and I accept his testimony — that it was at the request of the revenue auditor Mr. ...