Search - connection

Canada, 2012 DTC 5032 [at at 6684], 2011 FCA 352, aff'g 2010 DTC 1351 [at 4335], 2010 TCC 532-- summary under Income-Producing Purpose Summary Under Tax Topics- Income Tax Act- Section 18- Subsection 18(1)- Paragraph 18(1)(a)- Income-Producing Purpose connection between costs of private jet and any future dividend income was too remote The taxpayer, owned and operated by Mr. ... The significant expenses of a private jet which were incurred primarily in connection with Mr. ... Evans J.A. stated (at para. 14): Byram is relevant in that it recognizes that the connection between an expense incurred by a taxpayer and anticipated dividend income cannot be tenuous or remote. ...

Miller J stated (at para 17, 19 and 21): “[I]n connection with”… is a broad expression but does not…, even on a textual reading allow for the remotest of links, such as a link only arising by way of the “but for” test. … [T]he cost of legal services to chase after directors, who the Appellant claims have absconded with its money, is a need that would have been fulfilled regardless of where the funds emanated from. … [T]here is no commercial expectation that directors on winding up a corporation will abscond with funds and that the cost of such contingency is somehow worked into the cost of the supply. … The business of Look was effectively wound up before there was any activity necessitating the acquisition of legal services. … He added (at para. 26): [T]his is not an issue of timing. ... Similarly, if Look had to sue the purchaser of Spectrum long after the completion of the sale for breach of a confidentiality provision, again timing would not preclude a finding of a connection. Words and Phrases in connection with ...

Smith J found (at para. 525) that “the T3GR Returns were not intended to override a trustee’s other reporting obligations arising from the Act, notably the obligation to file a T3 Return pursuant to paragraph 150(1)(c) or to report taxable income arising from subsection 146(10.1),” and (at para. 533) that the assessments made by CRA based on the T3GR returns were made “only in connection with the taxable plans and not in connection with the non-taxable plans that were listed for information purposes only, including the RRSP Trust.” He went on to find that, not only were the assessments of the taxpayer’s RRSP under s. 146(10.1) original assessments that not statute-barred, but that the same conclusion applied to the assessments made under s. 207.1, stating (at para. 536): It follows that I must reject the Appellants’ submission that the Trust Notices of Assessment issued in connection with the Specimen Plan were “original” assessments for all non-taxable plans including the RRSP Trust. ...

The Queen, 2011 DTC 1087 [at at 480], 2011 TCC 66 (Informal Procedure)-- summary under Paragraph 6(1)(a) Summary Under Tax Topics- Income Tax Act- Section 6- Subsection 6(1)- Paragraph 6(1)(a) no strong causal connection between the employment and occupation of accommodation The taxpayer and her husband were both members of the clergy who ministered to a congregation. ... There is no strong causal connection in this case... as the house was not provided by her employer but was simply a house in which the Appellant and her spouse chose to reside. ...

Ontario (Minister of Revenue), [1988] 2 CTC 294, [1988] 2 S.C.R. 175-- summary under Income-Producing Purpose Summary Under Tax Topics- Income Tax Act- Section 18- Subsection 18(1)- Paragraph 18(1)(a)- Income-Producing Purpose direct causal connection to income need not be demonstrated In response to a submission that mining machinery and equipment had not been purchased "for the purpose of earning income" because the profits initially generated by the mine would be eligible for a federal and provincial tax holiday, Wilson J. stated: If [as established in case law cited by her] there is no need to demonstrate a causal connection between a particular expenditure and a particular income, and no need for the income to be generated in the same year in which the expenditure was made, then it would not seem to matter whether Mattabi suffered tax losses in 1971 or that it would have been exempt from tax had it made a profit. ...

After finding that the sale by NN Life was not an adventure in the nature of trade or a business, and noting (at para. 53), that s. 141.1(2)(a) "seems to describe a purchase and resale that is not in the ordinary course of business," Woods J stated (at para. 54): Although the scope of paragraph 141.1(2)(a) may be uncertain, it is clear that the provision does not apply unless the transaction has some connection to a business or an adventure in the nature of trade. ... There is no such connection in this case. Accordingly, the purchase of the trademarks was not subject to GST. ...

The words "relate to" indicate that the exception in s. 185(1) has a wide scope (only "some connection" is required: para. 50), rather than being restricted to financial services which are "incidental or ancillary to a registrant's primary business operations," as contended (at para. 46) by the Minister. ... In my opinion, this is a sufficient link or connection to justify a finding that the appellant's ABM operations "relate to" its other convenience store activities. ...

Valentine Maritime (Mauritius) Ltd. (2010), 38 DTR 117 (Mumbai ITAT)-- summary under Article 5 Summary Under Tax Topics- Treaties- Income Tax Conventions- Article 5 projects not interconnected The taxpayer ("Valentine") was a Mauritius company which carried on several construction projects in India, in connection with which it provided construction services in India for various customers. Under article 5(2)(i) of the India-Mauritius tax treaty a PE included "a building site or construction or assembly project or supervisory activities in connection therewith, where such site, project or supervisory activity continues for a period of more than nine months. ...

Although the Appellant did not close his business and still had the intention to restart it as a sole proprietorship, he has not established a connection, direct or indirect, between the legal services sought and any ongoing supply of taxable services. After citing Haggart and Doiron, he then concluded (at para 33): … The Appellant did not meet his burden to demonstrate that a direct and clear connection existed between the charges that were laid against the Appellant and the activities he engaged in for the purpose of earning income. ...

Loss doubted that “losses incurred by disposing of property that is ‘inextricably linked’ to the ongoing operation of the business are on income account” The appellant, a mining contractor, subscribed for shares of two junior mining companies in connection with being awarded mine development work by each company. ... Monaghan JA found no reversible errors in the following findings made by the Tax Court in concluding that the losses were on capital account: [T]he shares “were acquired and held …in connection with [the appellant’s] business”, “were not acquired for trading purposes”, and “constituted an investment …in the equity of the [mining companies]… intentionally [made]…with a view to further strategically enhancing its future growth, and recoveries/cash flow generated from its business.” ...