Archives - 2015

• 

  Olumide v. R. - FCA: Taxpayer out of time for judicial review of GST rebate claims

  18 décembre 2015 By Bill Innes

  catégories:

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

  Précis: Mr. Olumide applied for judicial review of a number of CRA decisions refusing him rebate claims. He claimed that his application was made in time because the claims were part of an “’ongoing matter’ not subject to any prescribed time periods for the filing of a judicial review application [para. 2]. Martineau J. in the Federal Court held that the 30 day limitation applied to each claim and the application of Mr. Olumide was therefore late and, in any event, had no reasonable chance of success. Mr. Olumide appealed that decision as well as another decision in which Justice Martineau had dismissed his application to clarify the first decision.
  Olumide v. R. - FCA: Taxpayer out of time for judicial review of GST rebate claimsPlus >
• 

  Elim Housing Society v. R. - TCC: Long-term care facility entitled to full 83% GST rebate

  7 décembre 2015 By Bill Innes

  catégories:

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

  Précis: This decision concerned whether a long-term care facility was subject to a 83% GST rebate, as contended by the taxpayer, or a 50% GST rebate as contended by the Crown:
  Elim Housing Society v. R. - TCC: Long-term care facility entitled to full 83% GST rebatePlus >
• 

  Centrepoint Foods v. R. - TCC: Most gross negligence penalties vacated - balance of appeals dismissed

  4 décembre 2015 By Bill Innes

  catégories:

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

  Précis: This case involved income tax appeals by both Centrepoint Foods Corporation (“Centrepoint”) and its principal shareholder as well as a GST appeal by Centrepoint. The assessments turned on alleged under-reported sales and over-stated expenses from a Saint Cinnamon franchise in a shopping mall in Kingston, Ontario. In a nutshell the taxpayers were represented by an agent who claimed to have documentation to support the taxpayer’s position on expenses which he actually displayed to the Court but never introduced into evidence.
  Centrepoint Foods v. R. - TCC: Most gross negligence penalties vacated - balance of appeals dismissedPlus >
• 

  9250-9893 Québec Inc. v. R. - TCC: Court rejects evidence of safe full of cash

  3 décembre 2015 By Bill Innes

  catégories:

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

  Précis: The appellant corporation ran a flea market and a swingers club. A CRA auditor realized that it reported no cash transactions although he discovered some $38,000 in cash deposits to its bank account. This appeal concerned GST on those cash deposits which CRA took to be additional business income. Those amounts were recorded as payable to its shareholder, Mr. Belangér. Mr. Belangér argued that the source of the deposits was cash that he stored in a safe in his home because he did not trust banks.
  9250-9893 Québec Inc. v. R. - TCC: Court rejects evidence of safe full of cashPlus >
• 

  Chaloux v. R. - TCC: Statute-barred year opened - penalties vacated

  2 décembre 2015 By Bill Innes

  catégories:

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

  Précis: This decision combines income tax appeals of Mr. and Mrs. Chaloux for 2005 and 2006 as well as a GST appeal of Mr. Chaloux for the period from February 1, 2005 to December 31, 2006. The subject matter was under-reported income (roughly $88,000) from a partnership operated by the taxpayers (60% Mr. Chaloux, 40% Mrs. Chaloux). There was also considerable discussion of allowable expenses. The main issue however dealt with the opening of the 2005 taxation year (which was otherwise statute-barred) and the imposition of penalties for that year.
  Chaloux v. R. - TCC: Statute-barred year opened - penalties vacatedPlus >
• 

  Cartier House v. R. - TCC: Care services in seniors home exempt from GST

  24 novembre 2015 By Bill Innes

  catégories:

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

  Précis: This decision involved claims for GST paid in error by operators of two seniors homes: Cartier House Care Centre Ltd. (“CH”) and Courtyard Terrace Assisted Living Residence Ltd. (“CT”). There were in turn wholly owned subsidiaries of Park Place Senior Living Inc. The GST at issue was paid in respect of “homemaker services” provided by third-party contractors. “Homemaker services” are exempt from GST under the provisions of the Excise Tax Act (the “ETA”).
  Cartier House v. R. - TCC: Care services in seniors home exempt from GSTPlus >
• 

  High-Crest v. R. - TCC: Nova Scotia funded seniors home for the “purpose” of housing seniors

  16 novembre 2015 By Bill Innes

  catégories:

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

  Précis: This case turns on a very narrow point. High-Crest Enterprises Limited (“High-Crest”) built extensions to its senior facilities using support from the province of Nova Scotia. It was agreed that this was a self-supply and therefore subject to HST. The dispute was whether the HST was computed in accordance with section 191 or 191.1 of the Excise Tax Act (the “ETA”).
  High-Crest v. R. - TCC: Nova Scotia funded seniors home for the “purpose” of housing seniorsPlus >
• 

  Andrei 95 Holdings Ltd. v. R. - TCC: Legal fees for shareholder fight not subject ITCs

  4 novembre 2015 By Bill Innes

  catégories:

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

  Précis: The appellant incurred legal fees during the course of a dispute between it, its shareholders and the shareholder of other businesses in which they were involved. The appellant claimed ITCs on those legal fees on the basis that it was engaged in the commercial activity of providing consulting services and the legal fees were incurred during the course of that commercial activity.
  Andrei 95 Holdings Ltd. v. R. - TCC: Legal fees for shareholder fight not subject ITCsPlus >
• 

  Alexander College Corp. v. R. - TCC: College not a “university” for GST/HST purposes

  19 octobre 2015 By Bill Innes

  catégories:

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

  Précis: This case turned on the very narrow issue of whether the appellant was a “university” for GST/HST purposes. If it were, then its tuition fees would be tax exempt; if not, those fees would be subject to GST/HST.
  Alexander College Corp. v. R. - TCC: College not a “university” for GST/HST purposesPlus >
• 

  Great-West Life v. R. - TCC: Payments for administration of drug benefit plan subject to GST

  16 octobre 2015 By Bill Innes

  catégories:

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

  Précis: This is a decision in two GST appeals dealing with whether certain services provided to the appellant were “financial services”. The appellant claimed that they were financial services and sought rebates for three reporting periods. The rebates at issue totalled roughly $4.2 million.
  Great-West Life v. R. - TCC: Payments for administration of drug benefit plan subject to GSTPlus >