Blogue

1-866-609-5811

Archives - novembre 2016

Alexander College Corp. v. r. - FCA: Taxpayer a “university” for GST purposes - Tax Court reversed
30 novembre 2016 By Bill Innes
catégories:
Précis: This decision turned on a very narrow point of law, elucidated in the Tax Court as follows: [4] The appellant contended that the Associate Degree, defined as a “degree” under the DAA is a degree-granting institution which is recognized by British Columbia provincial legislation, by universities and colleges within that province, by post-secondary institutions within and outside Canada, and by federal departments or programs. As such, it meets the definition of a “university” under subsection 123(1) of the ETA. Therefore, as a university, the Fees paid for courses (supplied) are exempt from GST/HST under section 7 of Part III of Schedule V of the ETA (“section 7”)
Alexander College Corp. v. r. - FCA: Taxpayer a “university” for GST purposes - Tax Court reversedPlus >
Lauzon v. R. - FCA: Fiscal Arbitrators appeal rejected by Federal Court of Appeal
30 novembre 2016 By Bill Innes
catégories:
Précis: This is an appeal from a Tax Court decision upholding a gross negligence penalty where the taxpayer had claimed $308,073 in false business losses in a Fiscal Arbitrators scheme. It is perhaps surprising that the Federal Court of Appeal reserved for 1 day and took a full 16 paragraphs to dismiss the appeal. Nevertheless Justice Woods is a very careful jurist.
Lauzon v. R. - FCA: Fiscal Arbitrators appeal rejected by Federal Court of AppealPlus >
Okeke v. R. - FCA: Trial judge’s finding that no cash donations made supported by evidence
29 novembre 2016 By Bill Innes
catégories:
Précis: CRA denied $9,000 in alleged cash charitable donations. The Tax Court found that the taxpayer had not proven the making of the cash donations and dismissed his appeal. The Federal Court of Appeal dismissed his appeal from the bench holding that there was ample evidence before the Tax Court to support its finding.
Okeke v. R. - FCA: Trial judge’s finding that no cash donations made supported by evidencePlus >
Aubrey Dan Family Trust v. R. - ONSC: Federal form of waiver effective for Ontario purposes
29 novembre 2016 By Bill Innes
catégories:
- Bill Innes on Current Tax Cases
- Other
Précis: The taxpayer is a trust. For 2007 it filed as a resident of Alberta. Ontario reassessed the trust on the basis that it was a resident of Ontario. The trust appealed to the Ontario Superior Court of Justice. This was a decision on a motion by the trust for summary judgment on the basis that the assessment in question was statute-barred. The sole issue was whether a federal form of waiver executed by the trustees and delivered to Ontario operated to extend the limitation period for Ontario purposes. The Court held that the waiver was effective for Ontario purposes and dismissed the motion. The parties were to make written submissions if they could not agree on costs.
Aubrey Dan Family Trust v. R. - ONSC: Federal form of waiver effective for Ontario purposesPlus >
Syla v. R. - TCC: Fraudulent donation claims - years opened up - appeals dismissed
28 novembre 2016 By Bill Innes
catégories:
Précis: Mr. and Mrs. Syla claimed false charitable donations which they may have bought from their accountant (in at least one case a false receipt was filed with Mr. Syla’s 2006 tax return). Mr. Syla claimed donations in 2003, 2004, 2005 and 2006. Mrs. Syla claimed donations in 2003, 2004 and 2005. The Court first concluded that the otherwise statute-barred years of 2003 and 2004 could be opened up. It next looked at the donations claimed and found them to be without any factual basis and dismissed both appeals. There was no order as to costs since these were both informal procedure appeals.
Syla v. R. - TCC: Fraudulent donation claims - years opened up - appeals dismissedPlus >
Athabasca University v. R. - TCC: Books supplied to students enrolled in distant learning eligible for GST rebates
28 novembre 2016 By Bill Innes
catégories:
Précis: Athabasca University provided courses in distant learning and, as part of the tuition for such courses, provided printed books (the “Books”) to their students which became the property of the students. They applied for an HST rebate on the books and were denied the rebate on the basis that there was a “sale” of the books to the students. Athabasca appealed to the Tax Court which ruled that the Books were part of a single supply of tuition to the students and therefore gave rise to a valid rebate claim. The appeal was allowed with costs.
Athabasca University v. R. - TCC: Books supplied to students enrolled in distant learning eligible for GST rebatesPlus >
Sapi v. R. - TCC: Charitable donation shelter cases - extensions to file a Notice of Appeal denied
25 novembre 2016 By Bill Innes
catégories:
Précis: This is a decision in 4 applications to extend the time to file Notices of Appeal. Each of the applicants has been involved in various charitable donation plans (comic books, pens, pencils, etc.). They relied on the promoter of these plans, Mr. Robert Mattacchione (who acted as agent at the hearing), and PAC Protection Corporation (“PAC”), a company affiliated in some way with Mr. Mattacchione, to deal with CRA on objections and appeals. PAC in turn relied upon a lawyer, Mr. Tony De Bartolo, to file appeals to the Tax Court where required. The evidence was that he appears to have failed to file these and other appeals within the time permitted.
Sapi v. R. - TCC: Charitable donation shelter cases - extensions to file a Notice of Appeal deniedPlus >
Bédard v. R. - TCC: Mixed result in opening statute-barred years in an RRSP scam
25 novembre 2016 By Bill Innes
catégories:
Précis: The six appellants in this decision were all the victims of a fraudster who was subsequently sentenced to prison for tax evasion. The subject matter of the fraud was an RRSP strip which resulted in amounts being included in the income of the appellants. The only questions before the Court was whether, on the facts, the Crown could open up the appellants’ 2001 taxation years by means of assessments issued in 2009, 4 years after the expiration of the normal reassessment period.
Bédard v. R. - TCC: Mixed result in opening statute-barred years in an RRSP scamPlus >
Evoy Estate v. R. - TCC: Trusts under testator’s will cannot be treated as one trust under 104(2)
24 novembre 2016 By Bill Innes
catégories:
Précis: Subsection 104(2) is an example of a very early avoidance provision of the Act that goes back to the Income War Tax Act. It was essentially designed to prevent separate trusts from benefiting from graduated marginal rates (now only applicable in the case of some testamentary trusts) where the terms of the trusts were designed such that “the income accrues or will ultimately accrue to the same beneficiary or group or class of beneficiaries”. This appears to be the only reported decision on the provision.
Evoy Estate v. R. - TCC: Trusts under testator’s will cannot be treated as one trust under 104(2)Plus >
Cheema v. R. - TCC: Bare trust did not deprive taxpayer of HST new housing rebate
24 novembre 2016 By Bill Innes
catégories:
Précis: Mr. Cheema enlisted the help of a friend, Dr. Akbari, to co-sign an agreement of purchase and sale for a new home as well as the mortgage on the property. Both Mr. Cheema and Dr. Akbari testified that Dr. Akbari did not contribute to the purchase price or the maintenance of the home and did not have any interest in the property. The Court accepted that evidence and ruled that the relationship was one of “bare trust”. As a consequence Mr. Cheema was entitled to the HST new housing rebate on the home (which CRA had denied) and allowed the appeal. There was no order as to costs since this was an informal procedure appeal.
Cheema v. R. - TCC: Bare trust did not deprive taxpayer of HST new housing rebatePlus >

Archives - novembre 2016

catégories

Archives