Search - connection

As the amended subsection 152(9) is inapplicable to appeals instituted before October 21, 2016, the legislation applicable to this case is the prior version of subsection 152(9) which read as follows: The Minister may advance an alternative argument in support of an assessment at any time after the normal reassessment period unless on an appeal under this Act (a) there is relevant evidence that the taxpayer is no longer able to adduce without the leave of the court; and (b) it is not appropriate in the circumstances for the court to order that the evidence be adduced. [46]   The definition of “tax shelter” as it read in 2008 and 2009, was as follows: In this section, “tax shelter” means any property in respect of which it may reasonably be considered having regard to statements or representations made or proposed to be made in connection with the property that, if a person were to acquire an interest in the property, at the end of a particular taxation year ending within 4 years after the day on which the interest is acquired, (a) the total of all amounts each of which is (i) a loss represented to be deductible in computing income in respect of the interest in the property and expected to be incurred by or allocated to the person for the particular year or any preceding taxation year, or (ii) any other amount represented to be deductible in computing income or taxable income in respect of the interest in the property, and expected to be incurred by or allocated to the person for the particular year or any preceding taxation year, other than any amount included in computing a loss described in subparagraph I,   would exceed (b) the amount, if any, by which (i) the cost to the person of the interest in the property at the end of the particular year,   would exceed (ii) the total of all amounts each of which is the amount of any prescribed benefit that is expected to be received or enjoyed, directly or indirectly, in respect of interest in the property, by the person or another person with whom the person does not deal at arm’s length. ...

Coverages generally provided for the return of the vehicle with protection for the differences between its appraised value and debt owing thereon up to specified limits or for payments to be made on account of such lease or loan obligations for specific periods before having to return the vehicle if the perils continued to exist thereafter. [10]   Under the Dealer Agreement, the Appellant was required to provide a complimentary policy to the customers who purchased or leased vehicles for personal use that covered them for 6 basic perils for which the Appellant was required to pay Walkaway a premium, but the Appellant could and made every effort to sell one of the higher grades of policies, which increased in price as extended time protection, more perils or more monthly payments were covered and for which the Appellant received compensation via keeping 55% of the premium and remitting the balance to Walkaway. [11]   The facts in dispute between the parties goes to the level and characterization of services provided by the Appellant and whether such services results in the Appellant providing an exempt supply. [12]   The Appellant takes the position that the services it provided in connection with the Insurance Products fall with the meaning of a “financial service” as defined in subsection 123(1) because they amounted to “agreeing to provide, or arranging for a financial service”, namely the Insurance Products. ...

DDMI was of the view that the Appellant met the requirements for the remote work location exemption in connection with the work done by him at the mine site. ...

At paragraph 29 of the Fresh Notice of Appeal under the heading “The AFS Re-assessments”, the appellant makes reference to the 1995, 1996 and 1998 taxation years and states that the Minister “... disallowed the deduction by the taxpayer of the Partnership’s losses that were allocated to the taxpayer as well as all interest expense and other carrying costs claimed by the taxpayer in connection with the acquisition of limited partnership units in the Partnership”. [15]   In paragraph 33 and 34 of the Fresh Notice of Appeal, the appellant is challenging the inclusion of the penalties, instalment interest and arrears interest for the 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2009, 2011 and 2012 taxation years which resulted from the deductions that were disallowed for the 1995, 1996 and 1998 taxation years and “which would not have been incurred had CCRA processed the AFS Waiver Objection”. [16]   According to the respondent, the appellant is raising issues with respect to the computation of his debt which is not within the Tax Court of Canada’s jurisdiction. ...

Aubin also tried to find a connection between the unexplained deposits into Ms.  ...

He attempted to have title registered in her name, but could not do so since, as a student, she did not qualify for the mortgage. [19]   In connection with the purchase of both subject properties, the Appellant produced documentation relating to his home insurance policies, utilities and phone and internet services. ...

The Appellant states that the actual legal fees and disbursements incurred in connection with the Appeals were about $57 million. ...

These provisions read as follows: 123(1)   commercial activity of a person means (a) a business carried on by the person (other than a business carried on without a reasonable expectation of profit by an individual, a personal trust or a partnership, all of the members of which are individuals), except to the extent to which the business involves the making of exempt supplies by the person, (b) an adventure or concern of the person in the nature of trade (other than an adventure or concern engaged in without a reasonable expectation of profit by an individual, a personal trust or a partnership, all of the members of which are individuals), except to the extent to which the adventure or concern involves the making of exempt supplies by the person, and (c) the making of a supply (other than an exempt supply) by the person of real property of the person, including anything done by the person in the course of or in connection with the making of the supply; (activité commerciale) business  includes a profession, calling, trade, manufacture or undertaking of any kind whatever, whether the activity or undertaking is engaged in for profit, and any activity engaged in on a regular or continuous basis that involves the supply of property by way of lease, licence or similar arrangement, but does not include an office or employment; (entreprise) 169(1)   Subject to this Part, where a person acquires or imports property or a service or brings it into a participating province and, during a reporting period of the person during which the person is a registrant, tax in respect of the supply, importation or bringing in becomes payable by the person or is paid by the person without having become payable, the amount determined by the following formula is an input tax credit of the person in respect of the property or service for the period: A × B where A   is the tax in respect of the supply, importation or bringing in, as the case may be, that becomes payable by the person during the reporting period or that is paid by the person during the period without having become payable; and B   is (a) where the tax is deemed under subsection 202(4) to have been paid in respect of the property on the last day of a taxation year of the person, the extent (expressed as a percentage of the total use of the property in the course of commercial activities and businesses of the person during that taxation year) to which the person used the property in the course of commercial activities of the person during that taxation year, (b) where the property or service is acquired, imported or brought into the province, as the case may be, by the person for use in improving capital property of the person, the extent (expressed as a percentage) to which the person was using the capital property in the course of commercial activities of the person immediately after the capital property or a portion thereof was last acquired or imported by the person, and (c) in any other case, the extent (expressed as a percentage) to which the person acquired or imported the property or service or brought it into the participating province, as the case may be, for consumption, use or supply in the course of commercial activities of the person. 199(2)   Where a registrant acquires or imports personal property or brings it into a participating province for use as capital property, (a) the tax payable by the registrant in respect of the acquisition, importation or bringing in of the property shall not be included in determining an input tax credit of the registrant for any reporting period unless the property was acquired, imported or brought in, as the case may be, for use primarily in commercial activities of the registrant; and (b) where the registrant acquires, imports or brings in the property for use primarily in commercial activities of the registrant, the registrant is deemed, for the purposes of this Part, to have acquired, imported or brought in the property, as the case may be, for use exclusively in commercial activities of the registrant. ...

He researched competing campsites in the geographic area and, as a result, entered a period of expansion, renovation and capital improvements that included the following: Installation of new water systems; The addition of 50 new extended season campsites with new water and sewage systems, new hydro connections and newly paved roads; Addition of picnic tables and fire pits at each campsite; Replacement of outdated playground with a modern structure; Installation of new security gates and cameras; Institution of weekly private garbage collection from the sites; Improved swimming pool, pool house, and pool area – including indoor showers and washrooms; Renovation of the picnic pavilion/recreational hall; Installation of a coin-operated laundry room; and Installation of outdoor athletic courts (beach volleyball, basketball, bocce ball, and horseshoe pits). [8]   The Appellant then began to actively market the improved “Lost Forest Park” through its own website and other forms of media. [9]   The campground had two types of fully serviced sites: seasonal and extended seasonal both used almost exclusively by mobile home / RV’s (i.e. on wheels). ...

VI- Conclusion [65]   As to whether the Appellant received a shareholder benefit pursuant to subsection 15(1) in connection with the leasehold improvements made during the subject taxation years, the Court finds that she did not. [66]   Consistent with the authorities cited above, notably Kennedy and Chandler, the residual value of her reversionary interest will have be to evaluated in due course, assuming WVM eventually decides to vacate the premises. [67]   As to the agreements (as described above) that were allegedly prepared and intended to mitigate the effect of the reassessments which are the subject of the present appeal, the Court agrees with the Respondent they are best described as an “ex post facto arrangement” which cannot be given any retrospective effect. ...