Search - considered

However, the taxpayer’s accounting firm immediately contacted the officer involved by email for an explanation and made submissions, and as part of further email exchanges the officer clarified why the items were not considered to satisfy the conditions for the drawback. ...

., on other Foundations) before her in her decision The appellant Foundation appealed from the refusal of the Minister to register it as a Canadian amateur athletic association on the grounds inter alia that the Minister had considered “irrelevant information in comparing the [Foundation] to other applicants and existing registered CAAAs” (para. 1). ...

The Tax Court had found that these certificates were “worthless pieces of paper” and that (contrary to the taxpayers’ pleadings) they had never acquired ownership of the pharmaceuticals and, therefore, could not be considered to have donated them. ...

Although 501 treated the acquired IP as depreciable property, it considered that Taxation Act s. 99 (equivalent to ITA s. 13(7)(e)) did not apply to reduce the capital cost to it of the acquired IP because, in SherWeb’s hands, the IP had been eligible capital property rather than depreciable property. ...

Iris considered that the requirement in ETA s. 229(1) that net refund claims be paid “with all due dispatch” meant that it should be paid right away rather than awaiting the conclusion of the audit, and appealed the dismissal of its motion in the Federal Court, for an interim mandatory injunction to compel the payment of $62.3 million in GST/HST refunds, to the Court of Appeal. ...

He stated (at para. 31): Although [43]-[47] of the 2008 Commentary are new, it is clear from [7] of the Commentary that they were considered appropriate for inclusion by the OECD because they were not in conflict with earlier versions of the Commentary. … On that basis, the 2008 Commentary, although new, would be admissible as an aid to the construction of Article 8(2) of the 1976 Convention which, as I have explained, adopted the wording of Article 7(2). ...

Wong J first stated (at para. 11) that “where a person pays 100 percent of their disability insurance premiums, both the court and the Minister have treated the resulting benefits as not taxable [citing Béliveau],” but then went on to find that exemption on this basis had not been established by the taxpayer, given that: she was “unable to conclude that the Aegon plan was a disability insurance plan” as she could “only see that it was a plan which paid her an annuity and that the insurer deducted the wages tax, which is considered income tax under the treaty” (para. 14); and there was “no objective third-party evidence to show the court that she paid 100% of the premiums.” ...

The Minister considered that substantial renovation of the particular building was “substantially completed” no later than October 16, 2013, but the taxpayer claimed a December 15, 2015 substantial completion date. ...

In concluding that this exclusion applied, Riverin JCQ found that: A qualified investment professional (an experienced CFA) devoted himself full-time to managing Boeckh’s portfolio; The portfolio had what he considered to be a high turnover (of around 30%, with the percentage of securities held for over two years, ranging from 31% to 45%, and those held for over five years ranging from 14% to 24%). ...

He considered the construction period to commence with the receipt of the building permit and to end with the point of substantial completion, being the point at which “there was some minor work to be done that did not prevent the house from being used for the purpose for which it was built.” ...