Beil v. R. - TCC: “Protest” appeals re injury to son quashed as out of time

Beil v. R. - TCC:  “Protest” appeals re injury to son quashed as out of time

http://decision.tcc-cci.gc.ca/tcc-cci/decisions/en/item/233061/index.do

Beil v. The Queen (July 13, 2017 – 2017 TCC 136, Hogan J.).

Précis:  This is a somewhat unusual case.  Mrs. Beil’s son was injured in an altercation with police while he was a student at University of Victoria.  He took several years to recover.  Mrs. Beil claimed a business loss of $450,000 in 2009 allegedly arising out of her work in caring for her son;  she attempted to carry that loss back and forward to shelter her income during the relevant years (2005-2013).  She also claimed a large loss in 2014 which CRA rejected and filed an appeal for 2015 before the year had been assessed by CRA.  The Tax Court rejected the appeals for all of the taxation years on the basis that they were either out of time or unproven.  There was no order as to costs.

Decision:  This was a sad case where the Court had no choice but to dismiss or strike the appeals:

[5]             In 2009, the Appellant claimed a business loss of approximately $450,000, which she attempted to carry forward and back to offset income taxes paid by her. The Appellant claims that this loss is attributable to income lost and expenses incurred through her acting as a caregiver to her son.

[6]             No documentary or testimonial evidence was provided by the Appellant to prove the make-up of her business loss. What the evidence does show is that the Appellant failed to file within the time prescribed for doing so notices of objection with respect to the assessments issued in respect of her 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 and 2013 taxation years. As a result, a condition precedent to instituting an appeal under subsection 169(1) of the Income Tax Act with respect to those years has not been satisfied. Accordingly, the Appellant’s appeal with respect to those years is quashed.

[7]             The Appellant did not file a tax return with respect to her 2008 taxation year. Consequently no assessment was issued in respect of that year. This Court has no jurisdiction to hear an appeal in respect of an assessment that has not been issued. The Appellant’s appeal with respect to the 2008 taxation year is also quashed for this reason.

[8]             On April 30, 2015, the Appellant filed her tax return for the 2014 taxation year. Among other things, she reported a non-capital loss of $327,518. On December 14, 2015, the Minister of National Revenue (the “Minister”) assessed the Appellant for her 2014 taxation year and disallowed the non-capital loss of $327,518. The Appellant objected to the assessment, which was subsequently confirmed by the Minister.

[9]             The Appellant has failed to prove, on a balance of probabilities, that she incurred expenses that were properly deductible by her and that could account for a non-capital loss of $327,518. It appears from the evidence that the Appellant claimed the loss as compensation for the loss of income suffered by her as a consequence of her having to assume the role of caregiver to her son. In the absence of evidence establishing the amount of the expenses, if any, incurred by the Appellant in 2014, her appeal must be dismissed in respect of that year.

[10]        Finally, the Appellant filed an appeal before this Court with respect to her 2015 taxation year. The appeal was filed before the Minister had issued an assessment in respect of that year. No appeal to this Court is available in those circumstances. For this reason, the Appellant’s appeal with respect to her 2015 taxation year is also quashed.

There was no order as to costs.