Search - 水晶光电 行业地位 发展趋势

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. ...

I have even more difficulty with the question whether the remainder of the Unit — that is, the moveable things such as baskets, pans, ete. — are agricultural implements. When, however, I read Itc m 409f as a whole and find that, after enumerating such things as ‘ ‘ Barn... track ’ ’, egg cooling cabinets, hay stack forms, milk coolers, steel stanchions for confining livestock, and brooders, it concludes the enumeration by the words, ‘‘ All other agricultural implements or agricultural machinery’’, I feel constrained to conclude that ‘‘agricultural implements’’ is used in the very broadest of senses and includes almost any apparatus, utensils or instruments used for agricultural purposes. If that is the correct view, almost all, if not all, of the ‘‘Unit’’ (other than things that have been incorporated into the structure) that is not otherwise exempt is exempt as falling within the words ‘ other agricultural implements ’ ’. ...

donne-la à la Paroisse, on ne te l’achètera pas.’ ”’ Notes du témoignage d’Orner ière: “Le curé lui a dit: ‘Martin, maintenant que tu as acheté la terre, donne-la à la Paroisse. ’ ’ ’ Il n’est pas jusqu’au nouveau curé de St-Théophile, M. l’abbe Roger Raymond, totalement étranger à cette volte-face, qui n’en atteste toutefois la réalité, disant: “Quand je suis arrivé sur place, je fus confronté par un état de fait: je sais qu’il avait été représenté à M. ... Harris, 5 T.C. 165, par le Lord Justice Clerk: “... the question to be determined being—Is the sum of gain that has been made a mere enhancement of value by realizing a security, or is it a gain made in an operation of business in carrying out a scheme for profit-making? ” A quoi il convient de joindre ces principes connexes, d’application concrète, formulée par le Président de cette Cour dans la cause de John Cragg v. ...

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. ...

On March 10, 1947, the Minister of Lands and Forests forwarded a letter to the appellant (Exhibit 3) in these terms: ‘ ‘ For your information I am enclosing a copy of the ‘ Manual of Requirements for Working or Management Plans, Operating Plans, Annual Cutting Applications and Forest Surveys’. ... In the case of Strong & Co. v. Woodsfield, [1906] A.C. 448 at 453, Lord Davey said: ‘6.. ... M.N.R., [1944] A.C. 126 at 133, where Lord Macmillan, in the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, said: “... ...

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. ...

"‘(d) such goods are for use by the manufacturer or producer and not for sale; the Minister may determine the value for the tax under this Act and all such transactions shall for the purposes of this Act be regarded as sales. ’ ‘ • 104. ... " ‘ Such is the solution of the Roman law and of the old French law which the commissioners have embodied in the Civil Code of Quebec. ... & N. 73; 156 E.R. 1123, the situation would be the same under the common law. ...

To assist in explaining how this assessment was made, there is set out hereunder the first, the second, the ninth, and the tenth calculations, and the final computation made by the Minister by which he found the estate tax payable to be $1,132,929.08: “1st Calculation Aggregate Net Value $5,242,455.21 Exempt Section 7(1) (d) $2,261,847.64 — $600,212.95 (P.V.) 1,661,634.69 Net Value 3,580,820.52 Basic and Survivor Exemption 60,000.00 Aggregate Taxable Value $3,520,820.52 Tax on $3,520,820.52 i $1,637,743.08 Provincial Tax Credit Schedule A 813,011.58 Estate Tax $ 824,731.50 2nd Calculation Aggregate Net Value $5,242,455.21 Exempt Section 7(1) (d) $2,261,847.64 — 600,212.95 (P.V.) — 824,7 = 836,903.19 Net Value,. $4,405,552.02 Basic and Survivor Exemption 60,000.00 Aggregate Taxable Value $4,345,552.02 Tax on $4,345,552.02 $2,083,098.09 Provincial Tax Credit Schedule (B) 1,034,009.34 Estate Tax Payable,x__ $1,049,088.75 9th Calculation Aggregate Net Value $5,242,455.21 Exempt Section 7(1) (d) $2,261,847.64 — 600,212.95 — 1,132,897.61 — 528,737.08 Net Value Ï $4,713,718.13 Basic and Survivor Exemption i. 60,000.00 Aggregate Taxable Value $4,653,718.13 Tax on $4,653,718.13 $2,249,507.79 Provincial Tax Credit Schedule (J) 1,116,585.44 Estate Tax Payable $1,132,922.35 10th Calculation Aggregate Net Value $5,242,455.21 Exempt Section 7(1) (d) $2,261,847.64—600,212.95 (P.V.) —1,132,922.35:: 528,712.34 Net Value $4,713,742.87 Brought Forward $4,713,742.87 Basie and Survivor Exemption- — 60,000.00 Aggregate Taxable Value $4,653,742.87 Tax on $4,653,742.87... $2,249,521.14 Provincial Tax Credit Schedule (K) 1,116,592.06 Estate Tax $1,132,929.08 Final Computation Total Value of Estate as per ET.60 $5,072,540.45 Increase as per attached ET.85 229,778.55 $5,302,319.00 General Debts — $59,616.60 Add Additional Surrogate Court fees 471.00 Income Tax 1960 Year 683.46 $60,771.06 Less Income Tax Refund 1961 year $ 14.67 Disallow Interest on Nixon Note 892.60 907.27 59,863.79 Aggregate Net Value — — $5,242,455.21 Exempt Section 7(1) (d) $2,261,847.64 — 600,212.95 — 1,132,922.35 — 528,712.34 Net Value $4,713,742.87 Basie and Survivor Exemption 60,000.00 Aggregate Taxable Value $4,653,742.87 Tax on $4,653,742.87 $2,249,521.14 Provincial Tax Credit as per Schedule (K)-, — 1,116,592.06 Estate Tax Payable... $1,132,929.08” On this appeal the following cases were cited by counsel for the Minister in support of the assessment made in this matter: New York Central Railway v. ... Firstly, in a case such as this, Section 7(1) (d) only authorizes the deduction from the exemption portion of the ‘ combination ’ 1 of Ontario duty and estate tax, and until the figures for both Ontario duty and estate tax have been computed, it is not correct to make a deduction at all. ... Putting these two calculations, above referred to, in other words and inserting figures, they are as follows: 1st Calculation Aggregate Net Value $5,242,455.21 Less Exemptions 2,261,847.64 Net Value., 2,980,607.57 Less Basic and Survivor Exemptions. 60,000.00 Aggregate Taxable Value $2,920,607.57 Tax on $2,920,607.57 = $1,313,627.78 Less Provincial Tax Credit: (Value of assets which do not qualify for Provincial Tax Credit: $25,624.85) $2,980,607.57 —$3.61— $25,671.24 x $1,313,627.78 2 X = 651,167.13 2,980,607.57 Estate Tax Payable $ 662,460.65 2nd Calculation Aggregate Net Value $5,242,455.21 Less Exemptions: $2,261,847.64 — $600,212.95 — $662,460.65 (Estate Tax found in first cal- culation) 999,174.04 Net Value $4,243,281.17 Less Basic and Survivor Exemptions 60,000.00 Aggregate Taxable Value Oo_ $4,183,281.17 Tax on $4,183,281.17 $1,995,471.83 Less Provincial Tax Credit: (Value of assets which do not qualify for Provincial Tax Credit $30,658.50—computed:) $38,250.13 $38,250.63 — $600. ...

Add: 25% corner influence $ 27,273. $ 516.354. ($36.00 sf) on 40’ (2) 179'4" x 80’ = 14,350 sf at $2,180. ff or $27.27 sf $391,264. Add: 25% corner influence $ 21,818. $ 413,082. ($28.80 sf) on 40' (3) 76'6%" X 100’ = 7,656 sf at $1,820. ff or $18.18 sf $139,200. Add: 25% corner influence $18,181. $ 157,381. ($20.55 sf) on 40' (4) 158'7" X 76'6% " = 12,150 sf at $1,045. ff or $13.65 sf $ 165,787. ($13.64 sf) (5) 76'6%" X 100’ = 7,656 sf at $2,410. ff or $24.00 sf $184,440. ...

During 1953 correspondence passed between the appellant and Doulton & Co. ... Basil Green of Doulton & Co. Limited which simply said: “Dear Mr. ... Inland Revenue into that of Barr, Crombie & Co. v. Inland Revenue. ...