http://decision.tcc-cci.gc.ca/tcc-cci/decisions/en/item/72119/index.do 
McCalla et al. v. The Queen (June 11, 2014 – 2014 TCC 199) was another case involving bogus tax receipts. The evidence of the CRA investigator, which was uncontroverted, was damning:
[9] The evidence of one Mr. Huenemoeder, CRA Team Leader-Charities Audit, indicated that the Jesus Healing Center had failed to keep any meaningful books and records, issued $3 million in donation receipts in just over 2 years, but only deposited some $18,000 into its bank accounts during the same period. The Pastors of the Jesus Healing Center admitted that no sum ever approaching the 3 million dollars was received and that charitable donation receipts were fabricated. Although some donations were received, the amounts were a small fraction (less than 7%) of the amounts receipted. No donation envelopes, receipt records or other evidence of any donations were ever produced or revealed during the CRA Audit. None of the 400 purported donors could provide collaborative or supporting proof of the donations.
The court simply did not accept the testimony of the appellants:
[16] Although unnecessary, I will briefly turn to the onus of the Appellants to provide evidence on the balance of probabilities (that is more likely than not) that he or she donated the money. Quite apart from the physical layout of the premises, which is frankly not a particularly important point since both parties may well be somewhat correct given the time sequence differences, the following evidence remains uncontroverted before the Court;
a) Not one of the 400 members of the Jesus Healing Center who purported to give these large donations to the Jesus Healing Center has ever produced a cheque, an ATM withdrawal slip, donation log or donation envelope relevant to the donations to the CRA;
b) The amounts of the donations are very large, although oddly symmetrical as to amounts given each week and yet oddly asymmetrical as to a logical and convenient amount someone would likely give by cash each week, especially where such amounts always consisted of the cash “I had on me”;
c) The Pastor, or former Pastor, admitted to CRA auditors the donation receipts were, at best, widely exaggerated and, at worst, bogus; and
d) These Appellants specifically offered no evidence of having more likely than not given the money: no ATM slips, no bank statements and no donation envelopes (not even an example).
…
[18] Aside from the countervailing evidence offered by the Respondent’s witness, which remains uncontroverted, by not providing any objective evidence to confront the Minister’s assumption that the cash donations were not made, the Appellants have not discharged on the balance of probabilities the onus they have before this Court. It is possible that some nominal cash may have been given, but on the basis of the evidence, not even remotely close to the claimed amount otherwise reflected in the deficient donation receipts.
[19] For these reasons, the appeals are dismissed.