Search - connection

Gut stated that Gerbro's characterization likely mirrored words used in the Funds' offering memoranda and that she understood “portfolio investment” to mean a group of investments. [58] 3        APPLICABLE LAW [60]         Section 94.1 of the ITA is the applicable provision in the case at bar, and it reads as follows: 94.1(1) If in a taxation year a taxpayer holds or has an interest in property (referred to in this section as an “offshore investment fund property”) (a) that is a share of the capital stock of, an interest in, or a debt of, a non-resident entity (other than a controlled foreign affiliate of the taxpayer or a prescribed non-resident entity) or an interest in or a right or option to acquire such a share, interest or debt, and (b) that may reasonably be considered to derive its value, directly or indirectly, primarily from portfolio investments of that or any other non-resident entity in (i) shares of the capital stock of one or more corporations, (ii) indebtedness or annuities, (iii) interests in one or more corporations, trusts, partnerships, organizations, funds or entities, (iv) commodities, (v) real estate, (vi) Canadian or foreign resource properties, (vii) currency of a country other than Canada, (viii) rights or options to acquire or dispose of any of the foregoing, or (ix) any combination of the foregoing, and it may reasonably be concluded, having regard to all the circumstances, including (c) the nature, organization and operation of any non-resident entity and the form of, and the terms and conditions governing, the taxpayer’s interest in, or connection with, any non-resident entity, (d) the extent to which any income, profits and gains that may reasonably be considered to be earned or accrued, whether directly or indirectly, for the benefit of any non-resident entity are subject to an income or profits tax that is significantly less than the income tax that would be applicable to such income, profits and gains if they were earned directly by the taxpayer, and (e) the extent to which the income, profits and gains of any non-resident entity for any fiscal period are distributed in that or the immediately following fiscal period, that one of the main reasons for the taxpayer acquiring, holding or having the interest in such property was to derive a benefit from portfolio investments in assets described in any of subparagraphs 94.1(1)(b)(i) to 94.1(1)(b)(ix) in such a manner that the taxes, if any, on the income, profits and gains from such assets for any particular year are significantly less than the tax that would have been applicable under this Part if the income, profits and gains had been earned directly by the taxpayer, there shall be included in computing the taxpayer’s income for the year the amount, if any, by which (f) the total of all amounts each of which is the product obtained when (i) the designated cost to the taxpayer of the offshore investment fund property at the end of a month in the year is multiplied by (ii) 1/12 of the total of (A) the prescribed rate of interest for the period that includes that month, and (B) two per cent exceeds (g) the taxpayer’s income for the year (other than a capital gain) from the offshore investment fund property determined without reference to this subsection. 4        ISSUES [61]         The first issue in this appeal is whether the Funds derived their value, either directly or indirectly, primarily from “portfolio investments” in listed assets (Value Test). ...

The assessment merely recognizes the debt.” [63] The example of Heavyside, in which the Federal Court of Appeal concluded that section 160 applies to a transfer from a husband to a wife where the husband was liable to pay tax even if the husband went bankrupt before either he or his wife were assessed, further demonstrates this point. [64] [157]    The Respondent has made submissions on the fact that Parliament has limited the ambit of section 160, speculating that it may exist since, in respect of subsequent taxation years, a connection between a transfer of property for inadequate consideration and the transferor’s tax liability is weaker. [158]    It submits that the definition of “fiscal period” contained in section 249.1 of the Act has existed, in one form or another, since the enactment of what is now section 160. ...

On the other hand, it has been held that the following were not bound by a contract of employment: a newspaper vendor not required to follow any schedule, a market porter working at hours of his own choosing, an “adviser” who does not have to adhere to a schedule in contacting his connections for the benefit of a business. ...

There was no connection. All other entities were connected. Patrick Cox at International was separate from Premier. ...

Pour l'application de l'alinéa a)(i), la société issue de la fusion ou de l'unification de plusieurs sociétés remplacées est réputée être la même société que chacune de ces sociétés et en être la continuation. 225.2. (1) In this section, "judge" means a judge or a local judge of a superior court of a province or a judge of the Federal Court. (2) Notwithstanding section 225.1, where, on ex parte application by the Minister, a judge is satisfied that there are reasonable grounds to believe that the collection of all or any part of an amount assessed in respect of a taxpayer would be jeopardized by a delay in the collection of that amount, the judge shall, on such terms as the judge considers reasonable in the circumstances, authorize the Minister to take forthwith any of the actions described in paragraphs 225.1(1)(a) to 225.1(1)(g) with respect to the amount. (3) An authorization under subsection 225.2(2) in respect of an amount assessed in respect of a taxpayer may be granted by a judge notwithstanding that a notice of assessment in respect of that amount has not been sent to the taxpayer at or before the time the application is made where the judge is satisfied that the receipt of the notice of assessment by the taxpayer would likely further jeopardize the collection of the amount, and for the purposes of sections 222, 223, 224, 224.1, 224.3 and 225, the amount in respect of which an authorization is so granted shall be deemed to be an amount payable under this Act. (4) Statements contained in an affidavit filed in the context of an application under this section may be based on belief with the grounds therefor. (5) An authorization granted under this section in respect of a taxpayer shall be served by the Minister on the taxpayer within 72 hours after it is granted, except where the judge orders the authorization to be served at some other time specified in the authorization, and, where a notice of assessment has not been sent to the taxpayer at or before the time of the application, the notice of assessment shall be served together with the authorization. (6) For the purposes of subsection 225.2(5), service on a taxpayer shall be effected by (a) personal service on the taxpayer; or (b) service in accordance with directions, if any, of a judge. (7) Where service on a taxpayer cannot reasonably otherwise be effected as and when required under this section, the Minister may, as soon as practicable, apply to a judge for further direction. (8) Where a judge of a court has granted an authorization under this section in respect of a taxpayer, the taxpayer may, on 6 clear days notice to the Deputy Attorney General of Canada, apply to a judge of the court to review the authorization. (9) An application under subsection 225.2(8) shall be made (a) within 30 days from the day on which the authorization was served on the taxpayer in accordance with this section; or (b) within such further time as a judge may allow, on being satisfied that the application was made as soon as practicable. (10) An application under subsection 225.2(8) may, on the application of the taxpayer, be heard in camera, if the taxpayer establishes to the satisfaction of the judge that the circumstances of the case justify in camera proceedings. (11) On an application under subsection 225.2(8), the judge shall determine the question summarily and may confirm, set aside or vary the authorization and make such other order as the judge considers appropriate. (12) Where any question arises as to the course to be followed in connection with anything done or being done under this section and there is no direction in this section with respect thereto, a judge may give such direction with regard thereto as, in the opinion of the judge, is appropriate. (13) No appeal lies from an order of a judge made pursuant to subsection 225.2(11). 225.2. (1) Au présent article, "juge" s'entend d'un juge ou d'un juge local d'une cour supérieure d'une province ou d'un juge de la Cour fédérale. (2) Malgré l'article 225.1, sur requête ex parte du ministre, le juge saisi autorise le ministre à prendre immédiatement des mesures visées aux alinéas 225.1(1)a) à g) à l'égard du montant d'une cotisation établie relativement à un contribuable, aux conditions qu'il estime raisonnables dans les circonstances, s'il est convaincu qu'il existe des motifs raisonnables de croire que l'octroi à ce contribuable d'un délai pour payer le montant compromettrait le recouvrement de tout ou partie de ce montant. (3) Le juge saisi peut accorder l'autorisation visée au paragraphe (2), même si un avis de cotisation pour le montant de la cotisation établie à l'égard du contribuable n'a pas été envoyé à ce dernier au plus tard à la date de la présentation de la requête, s'il est convaincu que la réception de cet avis par ce dernier compromettrait davantage, selon toute vraisemblance, le recouvrement du montant. ...

In this connection, Mr. Read testified that if it "was fairly obvious when it went to the review committee that unless something clarified the issues, that we would probably be on the refusal to rule clause, in which case the taxpayer was almost certain to go up the line over my head". ...

the Plaintiffs do not have a s 3 Charter right to any particular form of taxation and there is no causal connection, or legitimate expectation between their vote and the presentation of a budget before the House of Commons and resulting legislation; 13.   ...

., [1937] S.C.R. 36.   103                            The difficulty with the trial judge’s award is that it does not identify any causal connection between the profits the appellants were found to have earned through growing Roundup Ready Canola and the invention.   ...

This Court has found that administrative decision makers other than human rights tribunals may also have the authority to interpret and apply human rights legislation in connection with matters properly before them (Tranchemontagne v. ...

In one of the consultation papers, we find this interesting analysis: The actual history of the adversarial system reveals that the connection between adversarial processes and civil disputes is not as intimate or long-standing as some suppose. ...