Search - 阿里拍卖 司法拍卖

After finding that a settlement agreement had been reached (given the parties’ mutual intention to create legal relations, the flowing of consideration, sufficiently clear terms, and a matching on all essential terms), Lyons J went on to note (at para. 62) that: University Hill … reaffirmed the principles in Galway and CIBC and commented that settling the quantum of expenses is not an all or nothing function and involved a compromise of facts, therefore, “the Court will only interfere if the agreed‑upon facts clearly have no bearing to reality.” In finding that this “bearing to reality” test was satisfied, she stated (at paras. 77 and 78): I … find that the [non-capital loss] existed and was available for carry-forward to the March 2007 TY having flowed from the Pool from years prior to the 2007 Years that had been reassessed by the Minister based on the CRA records which included CBS’ filings. ...

The taxpayer had made an offer to the Minister on what C Miller J had described as a principled basis, namely, that the Minister would apply GAAR to GBL’s 2006 to 2013 years – but not to the earlier years on the basis that they were not covered by waivers provided. The Crown rejected this offer and made its own offer (which was made too close to trial to qualify under Rule 147(3.2), and was also rejected) that provided a concession on the characterization of foreign exchange gains and losses realized by GBL In finding that the Crown should not receive an award of costs notwithstanding its total success, C Miller J stated (at para. 11): [T]he Respondent had success in the ultimate result, but it was due to the one issue – the conduct of business principally with persons with whom it did not deal at arm’s length. ...

. … [I]it is only relevant to determine whether the Minister acted “with all due dispatch” during the two months that followed receipt of the application from the Builder and I have no difficulty in concluding that the Minister has satisfied that requirement. Even if the issue had been whether the Minister had acted “with all due dispatch” in the 12 months or so that followed receipt, I would have found that this was an acceptable period of time. … Words and Phrases with all due dispatch ...

However … the CRA lost or destroyed the documents. In light of this evidence, it would be unfair to place the onus on the appellants. In finding that for the 2007 year, the onus was instead on the taxpayers, and before finding that they had failed to discharge this onus, she stated (at para. 29): The appellants had available to them Newgate’s 2007 income tax return, as well as that of its associated corporation …. ...

After quoting with approval the position in Memorandum 3.3 as to the meaning of "delivery" and "made available" (signifying constructive delivery) and quoting with approval the statement in Marshall and Van Allen v Crown Assets Disposal Corporation, [1956] OR 930 (Ont CA) that “Delivery is accomplished by the purchaser obtaining the actual physical possession of the goods or, if certain conditions are present, there may be a symbolical delivery which divests the seller's possession,” she stated (at paras. 99, 104): … [T]he focus in section 142 is on “delivered”. Generally, that equates to delivery of a full voluntary transfer of possession of the property to the buyer immediately upon physical possession by the buyer without restriction. … Clearly, Customers were given full possession of the Jewellery at the time these were hand delivered, before or after airport security. ...

. … When making the subsection 297(2.1) assessment for the overpayment of the rebate, the Minister must consider subsection 296(2.1) since she is assessing an amount that became payable by the person under Part IX of the Act. … Since the Appellant was assessed, pursuant to subsection 297(2.1), an amount payable of $24,000 under section 264, the Minister should have considered subsection 296(2.1) when issuing the assessment in respect of the New Housing Rebate. ...

Colitto’s liability arose pursuant to section 227.1 … in his 2011 taxation year and was not in respect of his 2008 taxation year” (para. 48) – so that the condition in s. 160(1)(e)(ii) quoted above was not satisfied. ...

. … It is neither unusual nor surprising that a taxpayer would incur substantial costs in the renovation of a heritage building. … He then concluded (at paras. 64 and 66) in allowing the appeal: [D]espite the use of the words “at any time” in subsection 15(1), the Court must conclude that the residual value of the leasehold improvements cannot be quantified until such time as they revert back to the Taxpayer. ...

. … [T]he fees incurred pursuing the Oppression litigation had as its dominant purpose, the intention to protect the Appellant’s interest in her shares in the corporations. ... Therefore, I have apportioned the fees in issue. … I will make an estimate that 25% of amount paid in the Oppression litigation was incurred in order to receive income. ...

The Queen, 2020 TCC 33 (Informal Procedure)-- summary under Paragraph 8(1)(b) Summary Under Tax Topics- Income Tax Act- Section 8- Subsection 8(1)- Paragraph 8(1)(b) s. 8(1)(b) did not cover legal costs of an action to extend the period of employment The taxpayer worked as a provisional judge for the Montreal Municipal Court up until 2005, and then served as a full-time judge up until 2012, at which time he was forced to resign as he had attained the age of 70 – which meant that he was 23 months short of the requisite years of full-time service required to generate a full pension. ... Clément was instead seeking was the right to hold his office beyond the age of 70 and to be reinstated in his office so that he could accumulate credits for his pension. … Respecting the second ground, she stated (at para. 29): If Mr. ...