Archives - 2015

• 

  Supreme Court dismisses leave application in Piersanti – Jarvis rule does not operate to exclude evidence in the TCC

  20 avril 2015 By Bill Innes

  catégories:

  • Bill Innes on Current Tax Cases
  • Federal Income Tax
  • Personal Tax, Estate & Wealth Planning

  Précis: On April 16, 2015 the Supreme Court of Canada dismissed, with costs, an application for leave to appeal the Piersanti v. Canada decision of the Federal Court of Appeal which held that the Jarvis rule does not operate to exclude evidence in Tax Court proceedings.
  Supreme Court dismisses leave application in Piersanti – Jarvis rule does not operate to exclude evidence in the TCCPlus >
• 

  R. v. Caisse Desjardin de Québec – FCA: Requirement to pay served on bank of insolvent customer not effective

  20 avril 2015 By Bill Innes

  catégories:

  • Bill Innes on Current Tax Cases
  • Corporate Tax
  • Federal Income Tax

  Précis: A requirement to pay was served on the Caisse Desjardin in connection with one of its customers. Although the customer had money in its account when the requirement was received it was also indebted to the Caisse on a variable credit contract; the Caisse applied the money in the account to that debt rather than paying it in accordance with the requirement.
  R. v. Caisse Desjardin de Québec – FCA: Requirement to pay served on bank of insolvent customer not effectivePlus >
• 

  Nanica Holdings Limited v. R. – TCC: Dividend refunds need to be paid in order to erode a corporation’s RDTOH balance

  20 avril 2015 By Bill Innes

  catégories:

  • Bill Innes on Current Tax Cases
  • Corporate Tax
  • Federal Income Tax

  Précis: The taxpayer claimed dividend refunds in 2011 and 2012 which were partially denied by CRA. The denial was based on the fact that the taxpayer would have been entitled to dividend refunds in 2007 and 2008 had it filed its tax returns on time, but the returns were in fact filed outside the three year limitation period established by subsection 129(1) of the Income Tax Act.
  Nanica Holdings Limited v. R. – TCC: Dividend refunds need to be paid in order to erode a corporation’s RDTOH balancePlus >
• 

  Charania v. R. – TCC: Accounting error did not give rise to taxable shareholder benefit

  10 avril 2015 By Bill Innes

  catégories:

  • Bill Innes on Current Tax Cases
  • Federal Income Tax
  • Personal Tax, Estate & Wealth Planning

  
  Charania v. R. – TCC: Accounting error did not give rise to taxable shareholder benefitPlus >
• 

  Syed v. R. – TCC: Court confirms tax assessments of restaurant director based on alternative audit method

  10 avril 2015 By Bill Innes

  catégories:

  • Bill Innes on Current Tax Cases
  • Federal Income Tax
  • Personal Tax, Estate & Wealth Planning

  
  Syed v. R. – TCC: Court confirms tax assessments of restaurant director based on alternative audit methodPlus >
• 

  Okoroze v. R. – TCC: Taxes and penalties confirmed on net worth assessments

  10 avril 2015 By Bill Innes

  catégories:

  • Bill Innes on Current Tax Cases
  • Federal Income Tax
  • Personal Tax, Estate & Wealth Planning

  
  Okoroze v. R. – TCC: Taxes and penalties confirmed on net worth assessmentsPlus >
• 

  Maxwell v. R. – TCC: Director cannot raise due diligence defence based on a client’s continuing payment defaults

  10 avril 2015 By Bill Innes

  catégories:

  • Bill Innes on Current Tax Cases
  • Federal Income Tax
  • Personal Tax, Estate & Wealth Planning

  
  Maxwell v. R. – TCC: Director cannot raise due diligence defence based on a client’s continuing payment defaultsPlus >
• 

  Henao v. R. – TCC: No GST/HST New Housing Rebate where taxpayer’s uncle acted as accommodation co-purchaser

  10 avril 2015 By Bill Innes

  catégories:

  • Bill Innes on Current Tax Cases
  • Commodity Tax
  • Federal Income Tax

  
  Henao v. R. – TCC: No GST/HST New Housing Rebate where taxpayer’s uncle acted as accommodation co-purchaserPlus >
• 

  6379249 Canada Inc. v. R. – TCC: Miniature wireless printer development costs qualified as SRED

  9 avril 2015 By Bill Innes

  catégories:

  • Bill Innes on Current Tax Cases
  • Corporate Tax
  • Federal Income Tax

  
  6379249 Canada Inc. v. R. – TCC: Miniature wireless printer development costs qualified as SREDPlus >
• 

  Zeldap Corporation v. R. – TCC: No litigation privilege – taxpayer compelled to answer question on discovery

  9 avril 2015 By Bill Innes

  catégories:

  • Bill Innes on Current Tax Cases
  • Corporate Tax
  • Federal Income Tax

  
  Zeldap Corporation v. R. – TCC: No litigation privilege – taxpayer compelled to answer question on discoveryPlus >