http://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/site/fc-cf/decisions/en/item/64699/index.do 
Canada (National Revenue) v. Marangoni[1] (November 14, 2013) was an application to hold the respondent in contempt for failure to obey a compliance order under section 231.7 of the
Income Tax Act[2] which itself arose out of a requirement under subsection 231.2(1) of the Act. The facts of the case were fairly clear. The main issue was whether the respondent had mitigated his contempt at the hearing:
[34] With respect to this matter, the applicant invited the Court to impose the following sentence on a finding of contempt:
1. The respondent must pay a fine of $1,500, payable within 10 days of this order; said payment to be made to the Receiver General for Canada;
2. The respondent must pay the applicant costs awarded on a solicitor and client basis of $3,000, payable within 10 days of this order; said payment to be made to the Receiver General for Canada;
3. The respondent must comply with the compliance order of Justice Beaudry dated January 22, 2013, within 30 days of this order.
The court concluded that since the respondent had appeared at the hearing and produced what he claimed were the documents the Crown has sought he should be entitled to a somewhat more lenient sentence reducing the fine and costs and permitting payment over a period of 10 months:
[37] As the applicant stated, this is the respondent’s first breach. However, his attitude toward his tax obligations to the Crown constitutes an aggravating factor, since he breached the compliance order of Justice Beaudry in a flagrant manner, even after having been informed of the illegality of his actions. Further, the respondent never showed intent to accept his responsibility, in addition to complying with the requirement. On the contrary, he did not want to accept the service of the compliance order. Moreover, he never contacted the applicant to get more time so as to comply with the requirement. In contrast, the respondent appeared at the hearing, explained himself and had in his possession documents that he claims are those sought by the applicant and gave them to him. These factors favour a more lenient sentence.
[38] That is why I am of the view that it is appropriate to amend and set the conditions of the sentence suggested by the applicant, specifically so that it helps achieve the primary objective of the sentence, i.e. ensure compliance with the order of Justice Beaudry
[39] Therefore, in light of the record, it is appropriate to order the respondent to pay a fine of $500 and to pay the costs awarded on a solicitor and client basis of $1,000, all to be paid to the Receiver General for Canada in 10 monthly payments of $150. The respondent will also be required to comply, as appropriate, within 30 days of this order, with the compliance order of Justice Beaudry dated January 22, 2013, by communicating the information and producing the documents requested under the requirement of February 20, 2012.
[1] 2013 FC 1154.
[2] R.S.C. 1985, c. 1 (5th Supp.), as amended (the “Act”).