Search - 阿里拍卖 司法拍卖

Notwithstanding a statement in the Dealership Sale Service Agreements that neither party was “the agent … of the other for any reason,” she found that, in fact, Jayco arranged for the carrier (a Jayco subsidiary) to ship the RVs to Canada on behalf of the dealers rather than of it. In this regard, she stated that a statement in the Dealership Sale Service Agreements that neither party was “the agent … of the other for any reason” had “to be interpreted in its context” (para. 116) and, in fact, Jayco acted on the dealers’ behalf in arranging delivery. ...

Woods JA has found that this position is incorrect, stating (at paras. 40, 42): The CRA’s view … is that the taxpayer relief provisions cannot affect a filing requirement which restricts the issuance of a dividend refund. The problem with this reasoning is that this is exactly what the taxpayer relief provisions are intended to do — enable the Minister to provide relief from strict filing requirements.... ...

From this perspective, QST was avoided as a result of the vehicle being gifted by her ex-husband to her daughter, and then by her daughter to her – both of them, related-person transfers. In finding that these were not avoidance transactions for Quebec GAAR purposes, Poirier JCQ accepted the taxpayer’s testimony that the transactions had to happen this way in order for her to get the vehicle – her ex was only prepared to give the vehicle to her daughter. ...

In the course of so finding, he indicated (at paras. 73-73) that s. 67(2) of the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act reflected that “Parliament put the Crown on the same footing as unsecured creditors” in a bankruptcy – with an exception for employee source deductions, which “is explained by the fact that source deductions are amounts which belong to the employee in question … [and] this money does not belong to the employer anymore.” ...

Smith J stated (at para 9): … [W]hile the Appellant and his spouse may have initially intended to occupy the Property as their primary place of residence, … such intention was vitiated when they entered into the lease agreement. ...

Campbell J stated (at para. 14): … The fact that the tip amount is paid to a committee and pooled with other amounts paid to the attendants before distribution does not change the nature of the payment. It remains a gratuity for services provided by the slot attendant by virtue of his employment. … ...

In confirming this aspect of the assessment, Chalilfour JCQ noted (at paras. 116-117, TaxInterpretations translation): … Mr. ... It is appropriate to correct that situation. … The professional dues paid by Kyard must be added to the net income of Mr. ...

. … [P]ermitting the consolidation, within a single corporation, of tax charges related to remuneration of employees or directors of different corporations would risk … the inducing of an erosion of FDRCMO assessments which usually would be separately assumed by the corporations. ...

Consistently with the two-part test referenced in Sagaz (would the evidence, if presented have changed the result; and could the evidence have been obtained before trial with the exercise of due diligence – in that regard, notign that counsel had shown due diligence), and applying Rule 138(1) permitting a judge to reopen a hearing “for such purposes … as are just,” Sommerfeldt J allowed the invoices to be admitted after the hearing, after having given the Crown an opportunity to cross-examine the taxpayer on this evidence (which the Crown declined to do). ...

Canada (Border Services Agency), 2021 FCA 82-- summary under Ordinary Meaning Summary Under Tax Topics- Statutory Interpretation- Ordinary Meaning rebuttable presumption that the ordinary meaning of a word should prevail over its industry meaning After noting that the ordinary meaning of refrigerator did not require that the device be used for the storage of food, Locke JA rejected a taxpayer submission that a wine cooler was not a refrigerator notwithstanding that there was “no dispute … that the industry does not treat wine coolers as refrigerators” (para 7), stating (at para. 20): I do not wish to suggest that the ordinary meaning of a term should always apply even where it has a meaning in the industry. But there is a presumption to that effect, and that presumption is not rebutted by the mere fact that the industry meaning of the term in question differs from the ordinary meaning. ­­­­­­­­­­­­­ ...