Search - 阿里拍卖 司法拍卖

Accordingly … “three months” generally means the aggregation of the number of days in three months. ... Thus, preparation time generally would not be counted towards the three month testing period. … Regarding standby time, i.e., “generally a temporary pause from operation that could be caused, for example, by severe weather, or shortage of labour,” it stated: Such temporary interruption should not change the status that the installation or drilling rig or ship in question is being utilized in the business. ...

After finding that there was no exemption for the diplomat in Art. 34 of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations from the s. 162(7) penalty as the property " was not held on behalf of the sending State as part of the mission," nor was there any exemption for the child, CRA stated that "you may wish to consider exercising discretion in assessing the penalty given that….there was a loss on the property. ...

After finding that there was no exemption for the diplomat in Art. 34 of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations from the s. 162(7) penalty as the property " was not held on behalf of the sending State as part of the mission," nor was there any exemption for the child, CRA stated that "you may wish to consider exercising discretion in assessing the penalty given that….there was a loss on the property. ...

19 October 2005 Internal T.I. 2005-0151211I7- Financing expenses-- summary under Paragraph 20(1)(e.1) Summary Under Tax Topics- Income Tax Act- Section 20- Subsection 20(1)- Paragraph 20(1)(e.1) indirect use test inapplicable to s. 20(1)(e) or (e.1), and “relate solely to … year” test not satisfied by lump sum issue fee reimbursement to parent A Co, a public company, issued interest-bearing debentures to arm's length parties, and on-lent the borrowed money to its "great-grandchild" subsidiary (D Co) at the same interest rate. ...

Deloitte & Touche Inc., [2007] 2 C.T.C. 253, 30 C.B.R. (5th) 81, (Sask. ...

In this context, the use of the terms "action de remplacement " and "share for which the affiliate share was substituted" in the French and English versions of paragraph 93(2.01)(a) refer to the concept governed by paragraph 248(5) in respect of property that is shares. ...

. … There is a logical connection between the income from ULC and the U.S. taxes paid by Taxpayer because if Taxpayer did not own such shares, no U.S. taxes would have been paid [citing Smidth]. ...

In this context, the use of the terms "action de remplacement " and "share for which the affiliate share was substituted" in the French and English versions of paragraph 93(2.01)(a) refer to the concept governed by paragraph 248(5) in respect of property that is shares. ...

...

...