Search - connection

However, the Federal Court of Appeal has held that the fact that a judgment does not “extend to all of the issues that … could have been raised in the earlier proceedings in connection with the appellant’s cause of action” does not mean that issue estoppel cannot apply [12]. ...

Introduction [1]              The Appellant, Aeronautic Development Corporation (“ADC”), claimed refundable scientific research and experimental development tax credits at the rate of 35% (“Refundable ITCs”) in respect of expenditures that it incurred in its 2009, 2010, and 2011 taxation years in connection with the prototyping and certification of an amphibious aircraft known as the Seawind. [2]              The Minister of National Revenue (the “Minister”) disallowed the Refundable ITCs on the basis that the Appellant was not a “Canadian controlled private corporation” (“CCPC”) as defined in the Income Tax Act, (Canada) (the “Act”) throughout its 2009, 2010, and 2011 taxation years. [3]              The Respondent’s position is that the Appellant failed to qualify as a CCPC in the relevant taxation years because from August 17, 2009 to December 31, 2011 a non-resident shareholder (the “Controller”) exercised control in fact (“ de facto control”) over the Appellant within the meaning of subsection 256(5.1) of the Act. ...

Applicable law [24]         Subsection 169(1) of the ETA states the general rule for calculating an ITC by establishing the conditions that must be met for a registrant to claim an ITC, specifically that the property or service acquired must be used for consumption, use or supply in the course of "commercial activities" of the person as defined in subsection 123(1) of the ETA: 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) [My emphasis.] [25]         The concept of a business is also defined in subsection 123(1) of the ETA: "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) [26]         Subsection 170(1) of the ETA then imposes restrictions on calculating the ITC, namely that no amount shall be included in respect of the tax payable by the registrant in respect of certain property or services. ...

If Persepolis Inc. provided taxable supplies to 0781178 BC Ltd. with respect to the renovations, these taxable supplies would have to be taken into consideration in the calculation of the “net tax” to be remitted to the Minister for the Reporting Period. [31]         In the present case, Persepolis Inc. argues that it did not supply any goods or services to 0781178 BC Ltd. with respect to the renovations, except in connection with the 15% management fees it charged because it acted as Persepolis Inc.’s agent. ...

In this connection, I refer to the remarks made by Major J., when rendering the unanimous judgment of the Supreme Court in Mitsui & Co. ...

Ultimately, my primary reason for denying the Corporate Appellants’ motions would be the lack of connection that Mr. ...

(h)  personal or living expenses of the taxpayer, other than travel expenses incurred by the taxpayer while away from home in the course of carrying on the taxpayer's business; 248(1) Definitions “Personal or living expenses” includes (a)   the expenses of properties maintained by any person for the use or benefit of the taxpayer or any person connected with the taxpayer by blood relationship, marriage or common-law partnership or adoption, and not maintained in connection with a business carried on for profit or with a reasonable expectation of profit,... ...

Kassawat could render services to Telus, such as the cell phone, printers, Internet connection, etc. ...

It also does not apply to a claimant seeking financial compensation in connection with allegations of unlawful or wrongful acts by an employer [27] nor to protect the right to employment or a right to earn income [28]. ...

More importantly, the Court concluded that the directors in Canada “attended to business and legal affairs of the company which were required in connection with and were essential to the company’s business venture of owning and operating vessels.” [38]   It is clear that the Court in Bedford, was convinced on the basis of the evidence before it that the de jure directors residing in Canada exercised effective management and control and that there was no reason to derogate from the basic proposition that directors are deemed to assume that role. [39]   In the more recent UK decision of Wood v. ...