Search - 水晶光电 行业地位 发展趋势

. … As noted in 1455257, a proceeding is instituted before the Tax Court by filing “[a]n originating document” as prescribed by the Tax Court of Canada Rules (General Procedure). Pursuant to the Tax Court of Canada Rules (General Procedure), an originating document means a document that is filed under section 21 of the Tax Court of Canada Act …. The only document filed by the Appellant under section 21 … was the Notice of Appeal, which was filed on May 26, 2017, a little more than a month after the corporation was dissolved. … Subsection 242(1) of the Manitoba CA does not allow a dissolved corporation to initiate a civil procedure. … ...

. … Kossow … concluded that cases similar in nature should receive the same treatment…. …[T]he Global program was litigated before the Tax Court in Mariano (which was a lead case). … There is no cogent reason why I should not follow the decision by Justice Pizzitelli. … My ruling should be and will be consistent with Mariano concerning donative intent. ...

Therefore, questions asking about the purpose of an agreement or transaction, as well as questions asking about the reason for an agreement or transaction, could come within the purview of subsection 103(1) …. ... I do not think that the … Questions are improper merely because they seek to explore Mr. Thompson’s state of mind or (in his capacity as a director and officer of the Appellant) his reasons, purpose, intention or understanding in respect of the Transactions …. ...

Lafleur J rejected an argument that “on the basis of Hickerty, [2007 TCC 482] that where an appellant has taken positive actions to appeal and where that appellant reasonably believes that the appeal has been validly filed, the one‑year grace period had stopped running,” stating (at paras 75, 77 and 84): The Federal Court of Appeal in Carlson … made it clear that the one‑year grace period is strict and cannot be waived. … In view of the doctrine of the Federal Court of Appeal, the fact that the Appellant did not realize before August 2016 that the 2002 Reassessment was not appealed from can have no impact whatsoever on the calculation of the one-year grace period. … The fact that the CRA was mistakenly under the impression that the 2002 Reassessment was being appealed from and did not start collection proceedings before 2016 has no bearing on that conclusion. … The wording of section 167 and paragraph 167(5)(a) of the Act is clear and unambiguous; the language of this paragraph does not allow me to conclude that the time stopped running because the Appellant was under the wrong impression that the 2002 Reassessment was being appealed from. ...

. … Objectively, the letters and positions of CRA were not inconsistent, unreasonable or particularly ominous given the presence of an unreported capital disposition of some magnitude from Mr. Radelet’s tax return. … [T]he CRA … reasonably granted the extension, but in exchange for a waiver relevant to the upcoming reassessment period. ... Bocock J also found (at para 29) that none of the medical reports suggested that the taxpayer lacked mental capacity, and (at para. 41): … One can reasonably and objectively conclude, given the relative ease, precision and detail exercised by Mr. ...

. … … [S]ection 16 of Part III refers to instructing individuals in courses “other than courses in sports, games, hobbies or other recreational pursuits that are designed to be taken primarily for recreational purposes ”. ... Regarding the exemption in s. 3, she stated (at para. 47): If the school day hockey program offered by Victus Academy to its academic students is a separate supply …it is a supply of services (on-ice training and off-ice conditioning) made by Victus Academy, a school authority, primarily to its (academic) elementary or secondary students during the course of extra-curricular activities …. ...

MacPhee J found that the filing of the extension application was insufficient to consider that the proceeding (the appeal) had been launched before the dissolution – and essentially followed 1455257 Ontario in finding that the Manitoba statute “does not allow a dissolved corporation to initiate a civil procedure” (para. 13), and also stated (at para. 12): Pursuant to the Tax Court of Canada Rules (General Procedure), an originating document means a document that is filed under section 21 of the Tax Court of Canada Act …. The only document filed by the Appellant under section 21 … was the Notice of Appeal, which was filed on May 26, 2017, a little more than a month after the corporation was dissolved. ...

After finding that, consistently with Shapiro, that the harvesting and storage of stem cell blood from a newborn satisfies the first three elements, Bocock J dismissed the appeal, finding that the fourth element was not satisfied, stating (at paras 13 and 14): … The letter suggests something akin to good standard health practices. ... The provision creates a deduction for … present and future ailments. It is not intended to create a deduction for generic and undiagnosed population-wide illness and disease. The 2017 letter …, some 17 months after the procedure and its language, descriptive rather than directive, cannot provide evidence of a medical prescription undertaken by the Appellant in 2016. ...

. … … [S]ection 16 of Part III refers to instructing individuals in courses “other than courses in sports, games, hobbies or other recreational pursuits that are designed to be taken primarily for recreational purposes ”. ...

In rejecting this claim, Russel J stated (at paras. 12-14): CIBC World Markets [2012 FCA 3] … affirmed that the Minister of National Revenue can only assess tax consistent with his/her view of the underlying facts and law. … Here, DTI’s settlement offer … was simply a “let’s split it down the middle” settlement offer. ...