Search - 报销 发票日期 消费日期不一致

The French wording states that normalized pension is the amount that would be payable “si les hypothèses suivantes étaient admises” (= if the following hypotheses are “admitted”). ...

The liability of every director, officer, liquidator and member of a company that is struck off the register,... pursuant to section 280, 281, 283 or 344, shall continue and may be enforced as if the company had not been struck off the register. 286.(1) Where a company has been dissolved, … under this Act or any former Companies Act, the court may, if it is satisfied that it is just that the company... be restored to the register, not more than 10 years after the date of the dissolution or cancellation, on application by the liquidator, a member, a creditor of the company..., or any other interested person, make an order, subject to the conditions and on the terms the court considers appropriate, restoring the company... to the register. (2) Where a company or... is restored to the register under subsection (1), the company shall be deemed to have continued in existence,... and proceedings may be taken as might have been taken if the company had not been dissolved,... (3) The court may make an order pursuant to subsection (1) restoring a company... to the register for a limited period, and, after the expiration of that period, the company shall promptly be struck off the register,... 287. ...

At page 6013, Linden J.A. stated: …] otherwise agree that the Moldowan test should be applied sparingly where a taxpayer’s ‘business judgment’ is involved, where no personal element is in evidence, and where the extent of the deductions claimed are not on their face questionable. ...

. /?. [4] For the purpose of computing her income under section 3 of the Income Tax Act, a taxpayer is entitled to deduct losses which derive from a business or property which is a source of income; in order for a business or property to be a source of income it must either produce a profit, or at least the taxpayer must have a reasonable expectation of profit from it. ...

Appellant’s counsel referred to Courtney & Fairbairn Ltd. v. Tolaini Brothers (Hotels) Ltd., [1975] 1 All E.R. 716 (Eng. ...

. /?., [1992] 1 S.C.R. 877 (S.C.C.) the Supreme Court of Canada had occasion to consider the situs of unemployment insurance benefits for purposes of the section 87 exemption. ...

In making these assessments the Minister assumed the facts set out in Paragraph 4 of the Reply to the Notice of Appeal, which read as follows: [TRANSLATION] (a) the deduction for contribution to an RRSP in the 1993 taxation year was allowed at the maximum permitted by the Income Tax Act (“the Act”) and was calculated as follows: 1993 taxation year Calculation of 1992 earned income: Income $36,186 Less: union dues (110) Subtotal 36,076 Plus: R.R.Q. disability pension 8,368 farming profit 1,658 Subtotal 46,102 Less: rental loss (1,151) Total 44,951 1993 taxation year Rate x 18% RRSP deductible before adjustment 8,091 Less: 1992 pension adjustment (6,762) Maximum amount deductible for RRSP $ 1,329 in 1993 (b) the deduction for contribution to an RRSP in 1994 taxation year was allowed at the maximum permitted by the Act and was calculated as follows: 1994 taxation year Calculation of 1994 earned income: Income $37,119 Less: union dues (115) Subtotal 37,004 Plus: R.R.Q. disability pension 8,519 Subtotal 45,523 Less: rental loss (903) farming loss (214) Total 44,406 Rate x 18% RRSP deductible before adjustment 7,993 Less: 1993 pension adjustment (6,939) Maximum amount deductible for RRSP $1,054 in 1994 (c) on June 25, 1996 the Minister affirmed the appellant’s income tax assessments for each of the 1993 and 1994 taxation years. ...

The next two items are amounts of $528.00 and $ 1,000.00, supported by cancelled cheques written to J.S. ...

Justice McKenzie’s order of December 5, 1994 are deductible by him under paragraph 60(c) of the Income Tax Act which in 1993 and 1994 permitted a deduction as follows: (c) maintenance — an amount paid by the taxpayer in the year as an allowance payable on a periodic basis for the maintenance of the recipient, children of the recipient or both the recipient and the children, if (i) at the time the amount was paid and throughout the remainder of the year the taxpayer was living separate and apart from the recipient, (ii) the taxpayer is the natural parent of a child of the recipient, and (iii) the amount was received under an order made by a competent tribunal in accordance with the laws of a province. ...

Counsel concluded that these oppression provisions provide the remedy of an aggrieved shareholder — for example, a shareholder who did not receive dividends in the priority established by the Articles. ...