Search - 报销 发票日期 消费日期不一致

Rip" Rip C.J.           Citation: 2013 TCC 5 Date: 20130110 Docket: 2012-1071(IT)I   BETWEEN:   SUNRISE REALTY INVESTMENTS LIMITED., Appellant, and   HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN, Respondent.     ... Ft $19.9 $19.5 $18.6 $31.4 $18.4 $25.0 $42.9 N/A ADJUSTMENT GRID Market Conditions   Location   Lot Size   Other   Net adjustments 0   0   +   0   + 0   0   +   0   + 0   0   +   0   + 0   +  -   0   0 0   +   0   +   + 0   0  -   +   0 0   0  -  -  -     Reconcilliation/Conclusions: Comparable 1 represented an older sale of a larger vacant corner site. ... The building was reported to have been in good condition as of the effective date.                                                 ...

The Queen, 2009 TCC 204 (Informal Procedure)   Citation:  2009 TCC 204   Docket: 2008-2308(IT)I   BETWEEN:   KEITH SAMPSON,   Appellant, and   HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN,   Respondent.       ... JUSTICE CAMPBELL- ORAL REASONS..................... 3                                                                                                 Campbell, J. ... Peavoy     COUNSEL OF RECORD:     For the Appellant:     Name:     Firm:     For the Respondent: John H. ...

ALSAMMAN                           Applicant  - and-     HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN Respondent         ORAL REASONS FOR JUDGEMENT GIVEN BY MR. ... I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT I have, to the best of my skill and ability, accurately transcribed              the foregoing interview.                                   Antoinette Forcione, Legal Transcriptionist                                                           ...

Signed at Vancouver, British Columbia, this 8 th day of January 2009.         ... Little” Little J.           Citation:  2009 TCC 12 Date: 20090108 Docket: 2005-1893(GST)I   BETWEEN:   CHRISTINE RABY,   Appellant, and   HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN,   Respondent.   REASONS FOR JUDGMENT   Little J.   A.                FACTS     [1]      This appeal was heard in common evidence with the appeals from the income tax assessments concerning Christine Raby v. the Queen (“ Raby ”) and Aapex Driving Academy Ltd. v. the Queen (“ Aapex ”). ...

Signed at Ottawa, Canada, this 26 th day of August, 2010.     “G. A. Sheridan” Sheridan J.           ... Mills claimed a deduction for accounting fees in the amount of $133,215 by submitting 4 invoices detailed as follows:     Invoice Date   Description   Amount     Total   14 May 2002 6  - Monthly accounting fees (January to April 2002)- Preparation of 2001 tax return- GST   $20,000   $8,000 $1,960           $29,960     28 June 2002 7  - Monthly accounting fees (November 2001 to May 2002)- GST   $15,000   $1,050           $16,050     4 April 2003 8  - Planning, Research re: 20(1)(p)- GST   $52,500   $3,675         $56,175     20 April 2003 9  - Preparation of 2002 return for           Mr. ... Mills for his 2002 taxation year, the Minister only allowed $37,450 of the $133,215 claimed, as follows:     Date Invoice   Description   Amount     Total   14 May 2002  - Monthly accounting fees (January to April 2002)- Preparation of 2001 tax return- GST   $20,000   0 $1,400           $21,400     28 June 2002  - Monthly accounting fees (November 2001 to May 2002)- GST   $15,000   $1,050         $16,050     4 April 2003  - Planning, Research re: 20(1)(p)- GST   0   0         0     20 April 2003  - Preparation of 2002 return for Mr. ...

The respondent is entitled to its costs.     Signed at Ottawa, Canada, this 22nd day of July 2010.       ... Article VII Business Profits Article VII Bénéfices des entreprises         1. ... Article XXX Miscellaneous Rules Article XXX Dispositions diverses         1. ...

The Queen, 2009 TCC 620         Dockets: 2000-1755(GST)G 2001-2725(GST)G 2001-2726(GST)G 2001-2856(GST)G BETWEEN: VILLA BELIVEAU INC., S.A.M. ... Signed at Toronto, Ontario, this 10th day of December 2009.       “B.G. ...   [2]      The Bill of Costs submitted by the Respondent is as follows:   Tariff "B"   1.(1) Services of Counsel:   1(1)(a) For all services in a proceeding prior to an examination for discovery, not otherwise listed below $700.00 1(1)(g) For preparation for hearing $950.00 1(1)(h) For conduct of the hearing for each day or part thereof (6 days at $2,000.00 per day) $12,000.00 1(1)(i) For all services after judgment $450.00   TOTAL COSTS: $14,100.00       1.(2) Disbursements     Expert Reports – fees only (see attached) $181,942.86   Photocopying – Book of Documents $118.80   Registered Mail $38.07   TOTAL DISBURSEMENTS: $182,099.73         TOTAL COSTS AND DISBURSEMENTS: $196,199.73   [3]      Ms. ...

  [9]      The amounts shown in Schedule 1 may be summarized as follows:     Income Amounts           1997 1998 1999         In the Tax Court $192.65 $33,064.00 $10,486.00         In the Alberta Provincial Court-- $11,984.00 $10,486.00   Expense Amounts           1997 1998 1999         In the Tax Court $46,632.81 $26,140.75 $10,831.22         In the Alberta Provincial Court $19,599.62 $5,693.56--   [10]     On December 14, 2009, counsel for the Appellant filed a Notice of Motion. ...   [13]     In her Factum, counsel for the Respondent said:   …   2.                   ...   …   3.                   … the Appellants have been convicted, in the Provincial Court of Alberta, of criminal charges based on failure to report taxable income. …   …   10.               ...

  [2]      The principle data and the expenses denied by the Minister are set forth in Schedule A of the Reply to the Notice of Appeal, which reads as follows:   Schedule A   Taxation Year 2003     As filed Allowed Reassessed Employment income            Base salary 52,817 0        Commissions  42,314 0        Total employment income      $95,131                 0           Employment expenses      $27,404       $13,547 $13,857                 Items under objection and appeal As filed Disallowed           A. Office expenses            Cabinet 115 115        Printer 549 549        Phone 34 34        Phone connector 57 57        Presentation equipment          1,418          1,418        Total office expenses $2,173 $2,173             As filed Disallowed   B. Seminar and training                    Seminar on real estate sales 2294 2294        Seminar on sales 35 35        Motivational lecture 214 214        Basic HTML course             400             400        Total seminar and training expenses        $2,943         $2,943                   Total amount under appeal $5,116         Position of the Minister:   [3]      The position of the Minister is that the office expenses are capital in nature and the deduction of same is not permitted to the Appellant ...

(a)       at all relevant times, the appellant was a cabinet-maker employed by a cabinet-making business; (b)         in 1992, the appellant began building his own cabinet-making shop; he purchased a lot and built a workshop on it; (c)         the appellant admitted that he had started up his operation in order to make up for the periods when he was unemployed; (d)         the appellant started up his operation in January 1993 under the trade name "Ébénisterie Guillaume Enr." and devoted approximately 10 to 12 hours a week to it; (e)         advertising was done by word of mouth and no market study was conducted; (f)          the appellant admitted that his main employment had grown so much that he had had to work overtime since 1993; (g)         he admits that he turned down a number of customers and was unable to ensure that the operation remained profitable because he did not have the time needed to do so; (h)         the appellant had no recovery plan to ensure the profitability of Ébénisterie Guillaume Enr.; (i)          since 1992, Ébénisterie Guillaume Enr. has earned no profit; the net business losses claimed are as follows: 1992 $    4,580 1993 $ 13,989 1994 $ 10,145 1995 $ 10,754 1996 $    9,588 1997 $    7,769 1998 $    6,084 Total $ 62,909 (j)          according to the income tax returns, the statements of income of Ébénisterie Guillaume Enr. contain the following information: Year                       Gross                       Expenses                Losses                    CCA                        Net Income                                                    before CCA                                            Losses 1992                               2                           **                            **                           *                            4,580 1993                       1,299                          **                            **                           *                            13,989 1994                       6,134                          **                            **                           *                            10,145 1995                       7,958                          **                            **                           *                            10,754 1996                       7,980                      12,002                      4,022                        5,566                        9,588 1997                       11,629                      14,477                      2,848                        4,921                        7,769 1998                       10,804                      12,150                      1,346                        4,202                        6,084 *      capital cost allowance for 1992 to 1995 totalled $18,274 **    not available (k)         operating expenses always exceeded gross income; the capital cost allowance increased the operation's losses; (l)          the amounts claimed in respect of business losses are instead personal and living expenses of the appellant; (m)        consequently, the Minister disallowed the appellant the respective amounts of $7,769 and $6,084 claimed by him in respect of net business losses for the taxation years in issue. [3]      In his testimony, the appellant provided a report on the efforts he had made to carry out a project designed to occupy periods of unemployment and to subcontract with his employer at the time. ... Although the phrase "reasonable expectation of profit" is found in the Income Tax Act, S.C. 1970-71-72, c. 63, (the " Act "), its statutory use does not support the broad judicial application to which the phrase has been subjected.    ...