Search - 深圳居住证 办理条件 最新政策

(orally): — Mr. Werry, you must realize that we can only intervene in the decision of the Tax Court of Canada if you show us that the judge committed some error of law or made findings of fact for which there was no support in the evidence. ...

.: — We are all of the view that Mogan J.T.C.C. did not err in concluding that the moneys received by the appellant were on account of income and not capital. ...

I For my first legal proposition — that the BSF program, assuming that it can be viewed as a sort of agreement, is not of the type to which subparagraph 90(1)(Z?) ... (/>) be linked together so as to limit the extent of the word “agreement” to that of “ancillary agreement” — that is to say an agreement in the nature of a treaty or attached to a treaty — is wholly supported by the history of the protective tax regime adopted by Parliament in furtherance of the duties of the Crown toward Indians. ... An examination of the decision in Nowegijick v. /?. [8] indicates that income is personal property because its constituent parts are personal property. ...

Profit on the sale of the De Salaberry and Lachine properties was included by reassessment in the taxable income of the appellant for the taxation years 1963, 1964 and 1965 as follows: 1963 — $372,126.17 1964 — 110,050.60 1965 — 319,594.15 The appellant appealed against these reassessments to the former Tax Appeal Board. ... The testimony of Mr Goldfarb, Vice-President of Development and general manager of Ivanhoe, contains the following passages with reference to this question:.. « TO answer your question as to whether this was prudent, this was modus operandi, we had done that many times prior to this, and we were successful I would say in ninety-five per cent (95%) of the time, if I refer back to our first shopping centre in Dorval which is at the Dorval Circle if you recall, that land was also zoned residential, it was unzoned, and by representations to the City Council they changed the zoning to permit a shopping centre. ...

., concurring): — These are appeals and cross-appeals from three judgments of the Trial Division dated 2 October 1994 which disposed of Canadian Reynolds Metals Company Limited — Société canadienne de métaux Reynolds Limitée (“Reynolds”)’s appeals instituted against three reassessments for income tax. ... Without resorting to a survey of the ample jurisprudence on this issue, we will borrow from the following oft-cited passage from Viscount Cave L.C. in British Insulated & Helsby Cables v. ... Nchanga Consolidated Copper Mines Ltd. [1964] A.C. 948 (Rhodesia & Nyasaland) at page 960). ...

Au cours de l'année 1975, une entente intervenait entre l'intimée et l'appelante fixant l'indemnité en raison de l'expropriation à un montant de 954 282 $. ... De ce montant, une somme de 171 496,13 $ représentait la récupération de l'allocation du coût en capital relative à des biens de la catégorie 19. ... Suite à une entente en date du 9 novembre 1954, la Couronne avait payé une somme de 371 260 $ à titre de compensation, soit durant l'année fiscale 1955 de la compagnie, laquelle année fiscale se terminait le 30 avril 1955. ...

Without expressing any opinion concerning any of the other grounds upon which the learned trial judge based his judgment, we agree with his holding, in effect, that the agreement of July 15, 1964 between J & J Hotels Ltd and Vernon Motors Limited (pursuant to which the disbursements in issue were made) falls within the scope of subsection (1) of section 137 of the Income Tax Act; and we are, therefore, of opinion that the appeal should be dismissed with costs. ...

.: — The Tax Court Judge, Christie A.C.J.T.C. held that the respective appellants did not hold their condominium for the purpose of producing income and, therefore, are not entitled to deduct a “terminal loss” stemming from its ultimate disposition, as provided for under subsection 20(16) of the Income Tax Act. ...

.: — In spite of the able and extensive argument by counsel for the appellant, we are not persuaded that the learned trial judge committed reviewable error, either in his appreciation of the factual situation in this case or in his application of the relevant jurisprudence to the facts as found by him. ...

.: — We are all of the view that the Tax Court Judge committed no error in law in deciding the issues before him as he did. ...