Search - 深圳居住证 办理条件 最新政策

Edgar & J. Li, Materials on Canadian Income Tax, 10th ed. (Toronto: Carswell, 1993) at page 726-27. ... On the facts of this case it was held below that neither party to the transaction had such a purpose, a finding which tends to support the understanding that the purposes of both parties ought to be examined: on this last point see Bentleys, Stokes & Lowlees v. ... Specifically the Minister relies on the following passage of Brennan J. at page 215: Purpose may be either a subjective purpose — the taxpayer’s purpose — where it means the object which the taxpayer intends to achieve by incurring the expenditure; or it may be an objective purpose, meaning the object which the incurring of the expenditure is apt to achieve. ...

It is also true that the common-law tests to identify charities as set out in the leading English case of Pemsel v Special Commissioners of Income Tax, 3 TC 53; [1891] AC 531; [1888] 2 All ER Rep 296 (ie relief of poverty, advancement of religion, advancement of education, other purposes of a charitable nature beneficial to the community as a whole) — which tests have been accepted in this country (see: Guaranty Trust Company of Canada v MNR, 1967 SCR 133) and are now applied in practice (see: Information Circular 77-14 issued by the Department) — remain quite vague. ... I agree with Mr Justice Marceau that there is a factual difference between the Renaissance case and the case at bar, namely — in the case at bar the Minister’s decision to refuse registration was made solely on the evidence submitted by the appellant itself. ... Rejection of registration has for it, very serious consequences — for example — rejection would very seriously restrict its fund raising capabilities. ...

The classic statement of the capital expenditure or outlay rule was given by Viscount Cave, L.C. in British Insulated & Helsby Cables Ltd. v. ... See also Montreal Light, Heat & Power Consolidated v. M.N.R., [1942] S.C.R. 89; [1942] C.T.C. 1; 1 D.T.C. 535, aff'd [1944] C.T.C. 94; 2 D.T.C. 654 (P.C.); B.C. ... [on] an advance made to him but was paid on the principal sum remaining unpaid under his guarantee... ” Ibid. ...

He impressed the learned trial judge as “... ambitious, mentally very energetic, of great business acumen,'shrewd and with nothing about him of the naive” (see trial judgment, Appeal Book, vol II, p 252). ... Lord Loreburn added that the answer is in each case “... a pure question of fact to be determined, not according to the construction of this or that regulation or by-law, but upon a scrutiny of the course of business and trading”. ... I would, accordingly, and for the foregoing reasons, dismiss the appeal with costs. 1 Appeal Book, p 264. 2 *See for example: Pine Ridge Property Ltd v MNR, [1973] CTC 201; (FCA per Jackett CJ); See also: Racine et al v MNR, [1965] CTC 150; 65 DTC 5098 at 5103. 3 See: Stein Estate v The Ship “Kathy K’’, [1976] 2 S.C.R. 802 at 808 (per Ritchie, J). 4 See: Metivier v Cadorette, [1977] 1 S.C.R. 371. 5 Appeal Book, p 267. 6 + De Beers Consolidated Mines, Ltd v Howe, [1906] AC 455 at 458. 7 Compare: Union Corporation Ltd v Inland Revenue Commissioners, [1952] 1 All ER 646 (Evershed MR at 656-8). 8 + Tara Exploration & Development Company Limited v MNR, [1970] CTC 557; 70 DTC 6370. 9 J Unit Construction Co Ltd v Bullock [1960] AC 351. 10 Compare: The Queen v Rockmore Investments Ltd, [1976] 2 FC 428 at 430 and 431; [1976] CTC 291 at 293; 76 DTC 6156 at 6157—(per Jackett, CJ). ...

The discounts claimed by Crestbrook in these same taxation years were as follows: 1984 1985 1986 Sales $67,060,725 $55,591,118 $83,690,773 Discount $ 3,793,193 $ 3,148,053 $ 4,659,422 Discount as percentage 5.65% 5.66% 5.567% By notice of reassessment issued under Part I of the Income Tax Act, the Minister of National Revenue reassessed Crestbrook for those taxation years. ... First, he said that since section 251 of the Act defines in some detail the method by which corporate entities are deemed to be related for income tax purposes, the focus of this case should not be on "control" of Crestbrook by Honshu and Mitsubishi, but rather the deemed “ relationship” of Crestbrook to the two Japanese companies. ...

The total sum paid by the Province of Alberta to James Shaw, therefore, was as follows: $ 719,400 Compensation received November 6, 1977 566,100 Compensation received March 26, 1986 1,020.368 Interest received March 26, 1986 $2,305,868 On his 1977 tax return, the respondent reported the $719,400 partial payment for his land as a capital gain of $461,400, made up of the proceeds of disposition of expropriated land in the sum of $719,400 less the adjusted cost base of $258,000. ... M.N.R., [1983] C.T.C. 2589, 83 D.T.C. 531 (T.C.C.); Hallman & Sable Ltd. v. ... The Alberta Expropriation Act would treat the payment in question as interest and the trial judge himself recognized this when he wrote: “In reviewing sections 39, 40, and 64 of that Act I believe that the provincial law treats such a payment not as 'compensation' but as 'interest' ”. ...

The circumstances in which they started what they allege to be a business were described as follows by the judge at 867, 868: [...] ... (n.b.: CMS Inc. is a company incorporated by the appellants which purchased land in Windsor and constructed the office building in which they carry on their medical practice.) [...] ... In the lessons and boarding division, SCS would earn fees by providing lessons for those persons (adults and children) who wanted to learn English riding, and would earn other fees by boarding (feeding and caring for) horses which belonged to individuals who did not own a stable facility. [...] ...

The remaining terms of this agreement have little bearing on the present litigation although it is interesting to note that clause 7 provides that Bell's rights in the “ prunings” shall expire December 31, 1982 (i.e., one year prior to the termination of the lease and of the management agreement) and clause 9.00 provides that, in the event of inconsistency between the management agreement and the option rights agreement, the latter shall prevail. ... The defendant's allocation of the $1,000,000 is as follows: 1980 $ 2,341 1981 284,711 1982 284,711 1983 284,711 1984 143,526 $1,000,000 There is no dispute concerning the respective calculations. ... Hayton (Stevens & Sons Ltd., 1982).) The burden of proving that merger took place here lay on plaintiff. ...

Harvey & Company Ltd. ('Harvey"), an operating company engaged in various distribution, transportation and warehousing activities: Sir Leonard owned 254 Harvey shares and Littlefield, 661. ... Then, rejecting the interpretation of paragraph 56(2) suggested by the plaintiffs as one which would " put the kind of strain on the language of the section that it cannot reasonably bear", he concluded that the conditions of application of the provision were met. ... (Nos. 1 & 2), [1979] 3 All E.R. 976, at 984-85); in the case of a transfer of property, it would again amount to a sort of gratuitous doubling of the tax, since the transferee, not being taxed, would not be entitled to rely on subsection 52(1) of the Act for a consequential increase of his cost base for purposes of computing his future capital gain. ...

. /?., [2] that loans must produce an independent income stream for the taxpayer, through interest or fees, before any losses occasioned by such loans are deductible under subparagraph 40(2)(g)(ii). ... It would also be contrary to the comments of the Supreme Court of Canada in Stubart Investments Ltd. v. /?.. ... T.D.). 2 (1987), 87 D.T.C. 5059 (S.C.C.). 3 Ibid. at 5064. 4 | 1984] I S.C.R. 536 (S.C.C.). 5 ■’Bronfman, supra note 2 at 5067. 6 ^See for example: Brown v. ...