Search - 江苏苏美达轻纺国际贸易有限公司 关税政策 最新动态

" ‘ TRANSFERS TO EVADE TAXATION ‘ ’ <4 32. Where a person transfers property to his children such person shall nevertheless be liable to be taxed on the income derived from such property or from property substituted therefor as if such transfer had not been made, unless the Minister is satisfied that such transfer was not made for the purpose of evading the taxes imposed under this Act. 2. ... Section 32 in Chapter 97 of the Revised Statutes of Canada, 1927, appears under the heading ‘‘ Transfer to Evade Taxation. ’’ In 16-17 Geo. ... V, chap. 28) is ‘‘ Transfer of property to evade taxation.’’ This subsection 4 which was repealed and replaced as previously noted by 16-17 Geo. ...

In the forms attached to the assessments, it was stated: ‘“You are deemed to be in the business of lending money and purchasing mortgages at a profit, and under section 3(a) and section 4 of The Income Tax Act, to be taxable on the profits therefrom. ’ ’ It appears that the full amount of the tax levied by the assessments in dispute has been paid under protest. ... And at page 260 he said: ‘ ‘ In the present case the finding that the present Respondent was engaged in a concern in the nature of trade is final unless it be shown that there was no evidence to support it. ... What is the line which separates the two classes of cases may be difficult to define, and each case must be considered according to its facts, 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 V ’ In this case, I am unable to find that the appellant so ‘ ‘ organized himself’’ (to buy mortgages at a discount) in a commercial and mercantile way ‘‘or that the capital accretions represented gain made in an operation of business in carrying out a scheme for profit-making’’. ...

Section 58 of the Act, prior to its amendment in 1944, read as follows: " " 58. ... Then section 66 provides: " *66. Subject to the provisions of this Act, the Exchequer Court shall have exclusive jurisdiction to hear and determine all questions that may arise in connection with any assessment made under this Act etc. ’ ’ This language is, I think, clearly wide enough to cover questions affecting the validity or correctness of the assessment and any complaint the appellant may allege or have against it. ... The use of the word ‘ ‘ allow ‘ ‘ in the section connotes that there is a claim before the Minister for his consideration. ...

Counsel for the appellant, for the purposes of this case only, has admitted (a) that had nothing further occurred beyond the facts which I have above stated, the transaction would have fallen within the provisions of Section 32, subsection 2, and the appellant would have been personally assessable to tax on dividends received by his wife from the 400 shares of Me Caskey stock so transferred to her; and (b) that the agreement with his wife to revoke the original gift, and to sell the shares to her for $40,000.00 in no way affected the appellant’s liability to tax on income derived from such shares, inasmuch as he was satisfied that the word *‘ transfer ’ ’ was wide enough in its meaning to include a “sale” for value. ... Colvin, was desirous of selling his controlling interest in Whitehall Machine & Tools Limited. ... The words themselves alone do in such cases best declare the intention of the law-giver. ’ ’ That precept of the Lord Chancellor is, in my view, particularly appropriate to the circumstances of this case, for, in my opinion, and so far at least as this problem is concerned, the words of Section 32, subsection 2, are both precise and unambiguous. ...

The term “demonstrator” arose, I think, because of the fact—as will appear later—that the nine cars were carried for a time in Account 242 ‘ ‘ Inventory demonstrators ’ ’. ... Mr McConnan explained that the latter step was done at the request of General Motors, and, he added significantly, ‘‘to keep the unit count correct of the stock on hand ’ \ It will be seen, therefore, that the nine cars in question, from the time of their acquisition were carried in the accounts ‘ ‘ Inventory new cars and trucks’’, and ‘‘Inventory demonstrators’’, until the end of the year. ... Account 242 is also an inventory account called ‘* Inventory demonstrators’’. ...

It is sufficient to bring the receipts into tax if they are ‘ ‘ like ’ ’ rents, royalties or annuities, provided, of course, they fulfil the other requirements of the subsection. ... ‘ The next point taken by the appellant is that even if her receipts were royalties or like royalties, they did not " " depend upon the production or use of any real or personal property’’ and therefore did not come within subsection (f). ... (d) And with relation to a country, region, mine, process, etc.: To give forth, yield, furnish or supply. ‘ ‘ In Ottawa Electric Light Co. v. ...

In its income tax return for that year the appellant claimed, under the head of " " Sundries ’ ’, that it was entitled, in computing its taxable income to deduct as an expense the sum of $9,527.29 which it had paid to various social clubs in payment of the admission fees and annual membership dues of certain officers who were members of such clubs. ... Lion Brewery Company Limited (1910), 5 T.C. 568 at 581: " " It is clear that it is not every expenditure which is made by a trader for the promotion of his trade, and which, in fact, contributes to the earning of profits, which is a permissible deduction from the estimate of profits for Income Tax pur- poses? ... M.N.R., [1944] A.C. 126 at 133, where he said: " " Expenditure to be deductible, must be directly related to the earning of income.” ...

Quand la vente est moins haute, ça coûte moins cher. ’ ’ ’ Nous savons déjà que Richard Gagnon, le témoin suivant, nie énergiquement le prétendu paiement de $12,000. ... ’ D. Quel était le prix convenu? R. $68,000. Et monsieur Thibault m’a dit, exactement, en autant que je puisse me rappeler de ses paroles, et je crois m’en rappeler pas mal, monsieur Thibault m’a dit: ‘Pour ce droit de pêche-là, je peux bien te l’accorder, mais comme il n’y a pas de comptant sur l’immeuble... parce qu’il y avait trois mille piastres que le devais verser, selon l’entente,—’... il faudrait que tu me payes parce qu’il faut que je paye la commission de l’agent d’im- meuble, et ce serait normal que je te demande une somme de cinq cent piastres.” ... Moi, ça va me donner une grosse chance et ça ne lie personne.’ ”’ Pour peu que l’on compare cette raison qui, eut-elle produit le résultat espéré, épargnait à Thibault une taxe de $3,259.60, comme on le constate à la lecture de l’article 9 de l’avis d’appel, ne doit-on pas logiquement lui reconnaître beaucoup plus de plausibilité qu’à l’hypothèse d’une réduction de quelques dollars des honoraires du notaire Gauthier, selon la prétention de l’intimé. ...

In 1959 Johnson Walton Companies merged with Reid, Shaw & McNaught, insurance brokers, and the appellant has since continued as a partner of that firm. ... Estates, was to finance each of other companies called * ‘ little companies ’ ’ to build an apartment block or commercial building in Vancouver, and the business was carried out as follows: Whitelaw would select a property suitable for building and if approved by the directors of Welfar, a little company would be formed to purchase the property and to build thereon an apartment block or commercial building. ... M.N.R., 25 Tax A.B.C. 234; Osler, Hammon & Nanton Ltd. v. M.N.R., [1961] C.T.C. 462; [1963] C.T.C. 164. ...

The appellant says that the plans were established on the advice of an auditor and that the intention was to make payments into the Pension Plan for current and past service of the brothers Lebovie, then to pay out the money to them and terminate that Plan, whereupon they would pay the money into the Deferred Profit Sharing Plan, of which they would be trustees, and as such trustees they would use the money to purchase preference shares of the company as an investment, which shares when redeemed would provide money for retirement benefits for themselves; and that, pursuant to that intention, the appellant established the Pension Plan by its By-law No. 5 (Exhibit 37) on December 28, 1964, and appointed the brothers as trustees of the Plan; that it applied to the respondent for registration of the Plan under Section 139(1) (ahh) of the Income Tax Act and it was so registered by the respondent on April 5, 1965, under that section; that the appellant also applied to the respondent for approval of a lump sum contribution of $195,244.20 to the Plan in respect of past service of the brothers pursuant to Section 76 of the Act and to a recommendation by a qualified actuary, and was advised by a letter from the respondent dated September 8, 1965 (Exhibit 28) that the actuary’s calculations had been confirmed and that payments made to liquidate the liability in that respect could be claimed as a ‘‘special payment” under Section 76; that, acting in reliance on the anticipated approval of the Plan and the lump sum past service contribution, the company had paid the following amounts into the Plan: (a) Current service contributions: December 29, 1964 $ 3,000 March 3, 1965 $ 3,000 (b) Past service contributions: February 26, 1965 $ 60,000 March 2, 1965 $135,244.20 and in filing its income tax returns it claimed deductions on account of the said payments. ... The minutes (Exhibit 60) state that resolutions were passed (a) reviving the Pension Plan, (b) redeeming at par 15,524 preference shares issued in the name of the trustees of the Deferred Profit Sharing Plan, and (c) directing the trustees of the Deferred Profit Sharing Plan to refund to Wolf Lebovic $96,699.31 and to Joseph Lebovie $100,344.89 by distribution of the following assets to them pro rata: To Joseph Lebovic — cheque $ 79,443.79 — 350 shares Alcan 10,151.10 — 1,000 shares Revenue Properties 10,750.00 $100,344.89 To Wolf Lebovic — cheque $ 75,798.22 — 350 shares Alcan 10,151.10 — 1,000 shares Revenue Properties 10,750.00 $ 96,699.31 and to transfer to the brothers the ownership of certificates of the policy issued by Industrial Life Insurance Company on their lives. ... Anson-Cartwright, a chartered accountant and partner in Price Waterhouse & Co., was called as an expert witness by the respondent. ...