http://decisions.fca-caf.gc.ca/fca-caf/decisions/en/item/143158/index.do
Familamiri v. Canada (March 14, 2016 – 2016 FCA 83, Ryer (author), Near, Boivin JJ. A.).
Précis: The taxpayer was assessed GST, interest and penalties on management fees paid to him by 494743 B.C. Ltd. (the "Company") over a 6 year period from 2005 to 2010. He argued that he had entered into an agreement with the Company in 2002, with the consent of CRA, that he would not charge GST on the management fees. He was unsuccessful in the Tax Court and appealed to The Federal Court of Appeal. The Court of Appeal rejected his contention that there was an enforceable agreement that he did not have to pay GST. His appeal was dismissed from the bench, with costs set at $1,000 all inclusive.
Decision: The Court of Appeal rejected the notion of an agreement not to pay GST:
[5] The services provided by the Taxpayer to the Company constituted a taxable supply, within the meaning of subsection 123(1) of the Act. Subsection 165(1) of the Act clearly obligated the Company to pay GST/HST on that supply. Subsection 221(1) of the Act clearly obligated the Taxpayer to collect GST/HST from the Company in respect of that supply. Assuming that the alleged agreement was valid as between the Taxpayer and the Company, it could not override subsections 165(1) and 221(1) of the Act and negate the obligations of the Company and the Taxpayer under those provisions.
[6] Whether or not the CRA could validly agree to exempt the Company and the Taxpayer from their obligations under the Act - a dubious proposition at best - the record contains no cogent evidence to support the Taxpayer's assertion that the CRA was in fact a party to the alleged agreement. Indeed, the CRA is not mentioned in the single sentence that is quoted above.
This appeal was dismissed from the bench with costs of $1,000 all inclusive.