Search - 阿里拍卖 司法拍卖

. … The legislator, in enacting subsection 69(11) and 110.6(7) of the Act, had no intention of neutralizing the effect of subsection 74.2(1) in circumstances such as these. … In the context of the attribution rules, the purpose of the [s. 73] election is to permit a taxpayer to defer or not the realization of a gain, and not to permit a taxpayer to avoid attribution. ...

In such a case, the provisions of Article 7 … shall apply. The Indian taxpayer argued that the royalties received by it in India (which were accepted by Australia as not being attributed under Art. 7 to the Australian PE) nonetheless were “effectively connected” to that PE in the sense that the work in India advanced the common goal with the Australian PE of servicing the Australian customers. ... Such a construction gives effect to the language of Art 12(4) and is consistent with the extrinsic materials. … Used as an adverb in conjunction with “connected”, “effectively connected with” should be understood to mean having a real or actual connection with the activities carried on through the permanent establishment. ...

The benefit is …. 10% of construction costs of $259,293 or, $25,929. This is clearly an advantage not available to regular customers and only available to Mr. ... However, in finding that the Jaques did not for the most part receive shareholder benefits in connection with the Furnishings, he stated (at para. 38): … Park Haven's sole purpose in acquiring most of the Furnishings was not to bestow any benefit on the shareholders, but to furnish a show home so as to enhance the saleability of custom homes in the area. ...

. … [A]lthough auditors are entitled to be provided with “all reasonable assistance” in performing their audits (paragraph 231.1(1)(d)…), they cannot compel taxpayers to reveal their “soft spots”. … After referencing financial reporting obligations of public companies under provincial securities legislation including the accurate reporting of accrued taxes and before noting concerns of CPA Canada that required disclosure to CRA of tax accrual working papers would reduce the candour of disclosures by companies to their external auditors, he stated (at para. 86): By enacting subsection 231.1(1), Parliament could not have intended to vest the Minister with a power so sweeping that it would undermine those obligations. ...

The Minister refused on the basis that Cybernius’ T2 corporate income tax returns for 2013 and 2014 had not been filed – and that the credits also could not be used as Cybernius’ corporate income tax returns had not been filed within three years of the end of each relevant year. ... After noting the 90-day delay in ss. 225.1(1) and (2) for taking collection action, McVeigh J stated (at paras 45- 47): [I]f it is assumed the assessment dated December 18, 2006, and the reassessment on November 19, 2009, are valid …, the RTP on December 22, 2009, was statute barred since it was within 90 days of the reassessment. ...

. … With respect to the interpretation to be given to the word "knew", this Court clarified that a subjective test must be used to determine whether the requisite knowledge exists. ... That said, it is not enough to proclaim ignorance to escape sanctions; common sense and objective factors may be taken into account in deciding whether a claimant has a subjective knowledge of the falsity of his or her statements. … Before remitting the file to the SST-AD for a fresh decision, De Montigny JA stated (at para 14): By implicitly endorsing the decision of the SST-GD that the intent to defraud would be required for a person to "knowingly" make a false or misleading statement, the SST-AD erred. ...

. … The [wife and children] acquired the shares from the Appellant for a purchase price of $0.01 per share and immediately thereafter sold them for a cash purchase price of $8,645 per share. ... If the minimum EBITDA Target set out in the SPA was not met, the Appellant’s wife and daughters were still entitled to retain the full cash purchase price that they received. … [T]he price agreed to by the Appellant’s wife and two daughters on the one hand, and Dental Corporation on the other, satisfies the definition of the term “fair market value”, which is understood to mean “the highest price an asset might reasonably be expected to bring if sold by the owner in the normal method... in a market not exposed to any undue stresses and composed of willing buyers and sellers dealing at arm’s length and under no compulsion to buy or sell”. ...

. … [61] …[A] taxpayer should have the burden to prove, on a balance of probabilities, any facts that are alleged by that taxpayer in their notice of appeal and that are denied by the Crown. ... Woods JA, in also dismissing the appeal, stated that she agreed with the comments of Stratas JA, who stated (at para. 70) that he found “much of what [Webb JA said] … to be thoughtful, illuminating and attractive”, but also (at para. 71) that he declined “to express a definitive opinion on the correctness of his views on this fundamental point.” ...

Hogan J stated (at para 25): … In Aridi, I held that an accountant’s neglect or carelessness in preparing a tax return is not sufficient in and of itself to allow the Minister to reassess beyond the Normal Reassessment Period. ... Hogan J dismissed the appeal, finding (at para 31): When a taxpayer hires an accountant to prepare his tax return and is aware that tax planning involving a deferral strategy … is being used to secure a tax advantage for the taxpayer’s benefit, a minimum degree of attention to or oversight over the accountant’s work must be exercised by the taxpayer. ...

Respecting the conflict between ss. 142(1)(d) and 142(2)(d), which respectively deemed a supply of a service in relation to real property inside Canada or outside Canada to be made in Canada or outside Canada – so that a single supply here, which would have related to both, would have been deemed to be made both inside and outside Canada, Dawson JA found (at para. 95) that in this context of services in relation to a cross-border real estate portfolio, there were two supplies, so that the services in relation to the Canadian and foreign real estate were taxable and non-taxable, respectively: I see no reason in principle that precludes splitting up the supply so that the supply is treated as two supplies in order to recognize that ultimately the services are inherently distinct in one important respect: the services relating to the operation of the vacation homes located in Canada are services in relation to real property situated in Canada and hence are a taxable supply – the services relating to the operation of the Intrawest vacation homes situated outside of Canada are services related to real property situated outside of Canada and hence are a non-taxable supply. ...