Search - 枣庄市市中区 智博公考 地址 电话

.,• *:. ' • Copies of the actual insurance policies have not been placed before the Court but a copy of the certificate issued under the Union Mutual Group Accident Insurance Policy is attached to the special case. ... That the policy is a policy of insurance that was effected on the ‘‘life’’ of the deceased is clear from the essential nature of the contract, which is a con- tract Whereby a fixed amount is payable on the ‘death” of the deceased and an increased amount is payable at the same time if the ‘ * death ’ ’ was caused by ‘ ‘ violent and accidental ’ ’ means. ... & S. Industries Inc. v. Rowell, [1966] S.C.R. 419, per Martland, J. at page 425. 4 tI have in mind the comment of my brother Cattanach in Vaskevitch Estate v. ...

Bag 63 63 35 Monarch Quarters 42 35 — Moms Regular 63 63 35 Moms Quick Bag 63 63 35 Moms Squares 63 63 35 Golden Girl 42 35 35 Golden Girl Cartons.. 42 35 35 Golden Girl Quick Bag 42 35 35 Silverdale Squares.... 63 63 35 Buttercup 63 63 35 Top Value Regular.... 63 63 35 Top Value Quick Bag 63 63 35 Top Value Squares.... 35 Monarch Regular 42 35 — JAYMAX 63 63 35 Moms Family Pack.... 63 63 35 Discount Margarine.. 63 63 35 Golden Gal Squares.. 63 63 35 Monarch Squares 35 — Blue Band 63 63 35 17. ... The term ‘‘marine oil’’ is used to describe the oils so derived, presumably because whales and seals are not truly fish but marine creatures but in any event the terms ‘ marine oil ’ ’ and ‘ ‘ fish oil ’ ’ are used interchangeably in the industry. ... I do not think that, in common parlance, the words ‘‘ product of fish’’ can be considered as comprehending margarine, even though it contains fish oil as one of its principal ingredients. ...

The main function of a liquidator is to collect and realize all the assets of the company to be applied in discharge * of its liabilities. 5 Hals. 445. ... Devensh [1903] 2 Ch. 625 at 636; John Hood & Co. V. Magee (1918) 7 R.T.C. 327, at p. 350. ... The company is only approached through the liquidator because he happens to be the agent who administers the company and in whose hands the assets, the annual profits and gains of the company are, under a special Act, administered by him. s It cannot be contended that because the interpretation clause defining the word " " person ‘ ‘ does not mention the word " " liquidator” that he must escape. ...

ALEXANDER COLE 650 BRIAR HILL AVENUE TORONTO 12, ONTARIO Calculation of Profit: Capital invested by taxpayer in 1949 $ 8,700.00 Add: Net Mortgage interest earned by taxpayer in years 1949 to 1956 inclusive— 1949, 1950 $ 559.13 1951 563.06 1952.’. 1,420.29 1953................................................................... 2,187.38 1954 comme 2,012.47 1955 2,505.40 1956 2,244.51 11,492.24 Additional capital invested—1951 $ 1,300.00 —1952 18,000.00 — 1955 2,547.45 21,847.45 $42,039.69 Deduct: Withdrawals of Capital — 1953 $ 1,500.00 — 954 13,000.00 — 1956 16,500.00 $381,000.00 $11,039.69 Proceeds of Sale..... — 32,200.00 $21,160.31 Deduct: Mortgage bonuses and discounts taxed in hands of taxpayer — 1953 $ 236.87 — 1954 3,479.83 — 1955............_.. 2,440.71 Mortgage bonuses and discounts not taxed in hands of taxpayer due to Statutory Limitations under Section 46(4) of the Income Tax Act 4,087.32 $10,244.23 Profit $10,916.08” It was agreed that the figure $10,916.08 corresponded to the actual accrued entitlement of the appellant of bonuses on the mortgages on a pro rata basis in respect to the second mortgages held by this so-called syndicate at this material time. ... & Ad. 172, which shows that an assignment by one partner of his share to the other does put an end to the partnership, as indeed must obviously be the case. ... The Partnership Act, 1890, leaves the matter in doubt, because the Act provides by s. 46 that the rules of equity and common law applicable to partnership shall continue in force except in so far as they are inconsistent with the express provisions of the Act, and it is very arguable whether the addition of other causes of dissolution is inconsistent with a section which expresses certain causes. ’ ’ Apparently, the sections regarding dissolution of partnership which were included in the English Partnership Act, in 1890, have been transposed unchanged into The Partnerships Act, R.S.O. 1960, c. 288, and so the statutory enactments are identical in this matter. ...

This may be illustrated by reference to a life insurance endowment contract where, for example, the face of the policy was $5,000, but at the end of a stated term the payments to be made or credited to the insured under the policy, or to a beneficiary, might, by reason of the accumulation of profits, reach the sum of say $7,000; in that case the payment or credit of the accumulation of profits, $2,000, is not to be treated as " " income, ‘ ‘ at least that is my view in such a case. That illustration would be applicable to life insurance annuity contracts if similar payments or credits were made, or earned, and the words of the section read " " life insurance endowment or annuity contracts.’’ ... We are here concerned only with the true nature of the insurance contract in question and particularly the nature of the payments made thereunder to the appellant; the contract required the insuring company to pay to the appellant a fixed monthly sum if she survived her husband, virtually for the balance of her life, and the question is whether or not that is " " income ‘ from a life insurance annuity contract. ...

The foregoing loss was computed in the following manner: Date of Date of Purchase Sale Sale Profit Loss 100 shares—Bristol- Myers Company Sept. 28/61 Mar. 16/64 $5,181.38 300 shares—Manu facturers & Traders Trust Co. of Buffalo Nov. 21/61 Mar. 16/64 $ 3,102.51 208 shares—Atlas Credit Corpora tion Dec. 1/61 Mar. 19/64 3,188.06 200 shares—Marrud, Inc. ... In paragraph 29 of the Notice to Admit Facts the allocation of the appellant’s capital during its fiscal years 1955 to 1964 is tabulated as follows: Mortgages Total Year Receivable Cash Stocks Bonds Capital 1955 $ 29,493.07 $11,021.56 $36,240.42 $86,025.00 $162,780.05 1956 47,878.10 13,248.84 29,607.93 86,025.00 176,759.87 1957 67,844.19 11,757.97 589.28 86,025.00 166,216.44 1958.......... 103,105.99 1,730.21 589.28 86,025.00 191,450.48 1959.......... 113,977.19 1,625.77 589.28 86,025.00 202,217.24 1960.......... 109,743.66 1,887.28 589.28 86,025.00 198,245.22 1961.... 91,161.78 1,463.88 9,096.77 86,025.00 187,747.43 1962.... 84,447.67 5,480.21 50,117.76 2,842.15 142,887.79 1963.... 66,830.79 31,746.88 50,143.48 2,842.15 151,563.30 1964.... 58,383.97 69,643.22 15,717.44 Nil 143,744.63 During its fiscal years 1955 to 1964 inclusive, the appellant received income from the following sources: Mortgages: Year Interest Bank and Bonus Interest Dividends Bonds 1955..... $ 2,724.38 — $ 127.50 $ 812.60 1956 4,355.39 — 1,600.65 4,777.40 1957 4,808.68 — 56.30 2,795.00 1958......... 6,109.82 — 25.82 2,795.00 1959... 9,711.23 — 29.76 2,795.00 1960 10,147.42 — 29.76 2,795.00 1961 9,784.80 — 37.17 2,795.00 1962..... 8,180.86 — 447.09 459.45 1963 8,796.63 — 692.41 Nil 1964.... 7,078.41 $479.64 734.80 Nil $71,697.62 $479.64 $3,781.26 $20,024.45 It is common ground between the parties that Jack Maibach was the guiding force in all transactions of the appellant. ... In Sutton Lumber & Trading Company Limited v. M.N. R., [1953] 2 S.C.R. 77 at 83; [1953] C.T.C. at 244, Locke, J. said: The question to be decided is not as to what business or trade the company might have carried. on under its memorandum, but rather what in truth the business it did engage in. ...

The claim for the tax is made under Section 86 of the Excise Tax Act, formerly the Special War Revenue Act, R.S.C. 1927, ¢. 179. ... Planters Nut & Chocolate Co. Ltd., [1952] Ex. C.R. 91 at 92; [1951] C.T.C. 366. ... Webster’s New International Dictionary, Second Edition, defines ‘ ‘ implement ’ ’ as follows: “1. ...

According to Section 76(2), the appellant, in 1958, had the right to deduct. ‘ There may be deducted ’ an amount not exceeding the amount of the special payment minus the aggregate of the amounts that were deductible. ... It may well, for a particular ‘ ‘ exempt ’ ’ year, result in a loss that will be deductible in computing the taxable income for some other year in respect of which the respondent is not ‘‘exempt’’ under Section 62. I find further support for my view as to what was ‘ ‘ deductible ’ ’ under old Section 76 in computing income for a particular year in the fact that, when Parliament intended that amounts shall not be regarded as ‘‘deductible’’ to such an extent as to create a loss, it went to some pains to define the amount deductible as not exceeding what the income for the year would be if the deduction in question were not allowed. ...

" (b) in Schedule IT, at the rate set opposite to each item in the said schedule. ‘ ‘ Schedule II to which sec. 80 refers contains (inter alia) the following item: " 3. ... The word " " producer ‘ ‘ is defined: In the Oxford Dictionary— " " (1) One who or that which produces. ... In the Imperial Dictionary— " " To make, to bring into being or form 7? ...

The deductions were claimed under the United Kingdom Income Tax Act. 1918, Schedule E, Rule 9, which reads: ‘ " 9. ... It must be made for the purpose of earning the profits. ‘ ‘ And in Robert Addie d Sons’ Collieries v. ... Moreover, the words ascertained ’ and ' unascertained ’ appear in a parallel construction, namely, "‘whether ascertained and capable of computation as being..., or unascertained as being... ’’; and both equally relate to what precedes them. ...