Blogue

Remtilla v. R. - TCC: T1 Adjustment Requests operated as waivers of statute-barred years

28 août 2015 By Bill Innes

Précis: The taxpayer (a tax accountant) and his wife traded securities through a brokerage account. In 2005, 2006 and 2007 they treated their gains and losses as being on capital account. In 2008 they had large losses (roughly $500,000 each). In filing their 2008 returns they claimed their losses as business losses. They also filed T1 Adjustment Requests to have their 2005, 2006 and 2007 gains and losses treated as being from business. They entered into a settlement with CRA in 2012 under the terms of which they were given business loss treatment in 2008. However after the settlement was reached they objected to the reassessment of their gains in 2006 and 2007 as being on income account.
Remtilla v. R. - TCC: T1 Adjustment Requests operated as waivers of statute-barred yearsPlus >

Rossi v. R. - TCC: Court dismisses appeal filed four years late

27 août 2015 By Bill Innes

Précis: Mr. Rossi was reassessed for 2003 in 2006; he filed a notice of objection in a timely manner. In 2010 CRA confirmed the 2003 reassessment by letter sent to Mr. Rossi by registered mail with a copy by first class mail to his accountant. When the letter sent to Mr. Rossi was returned to CRA unclaimed, it sent the letter to Mr. Rossi again, this time by first class mail, also in 2010. Mr. Rossi and his accountant claimed that in reviewing his account with CRA it was not clear that the 2003 reassessment had been confirmed. In 2014 Mr. Rossi filed a notice of appeal in the Tax Court and CRA moved to have it dismissed.
Rossi v. R. - TCC: Court dismisses appeal filed four years latePlus >

Basic v. R. - TCC: Taxpayer denied deduction of most home office expenses

27 août 2015 By Bill Innes

Précis: Mr. Basic operated an aluminum siding business from his home. He was reassessed for 2007 denying roughly $50,000 of the expenses he claimed. He was also assessed for unremitted GST. The two appeals were heard together.
Basic v. R. - TCC: Taxpayer denied deduction of most home office expensesPlus >

Tréport Wedding and Convention Centre Ltd. v. R. - TCC: Banquet hall workers not employees

26 août 2015 By Bill Innes

Précis: The appellant had in excess of 100 workers for the operation of five banquet rooms it operated in one leased banquet hall. With the exception of two workers that the appellant conceded were employees the Court held that the rest were all independent contractors since they were under little supervision and negotiated their own pay rates.
Tréport Wedding and Convention Centre Ltd. v. R. - TCC: Banquet hall workers not employeesPlus >

Ali v. R. - TCC: Court rejects evidence that all expense documentation lost

26 août 2015 By Bill Innes

Précis: Over the 2007, 2008, 2009 and 2010 taxation years Ms. Ali claimed large deductions for employment and business expenses and tuition. CRA rejected the bulk of her claims as being unsubstantiated. The Tax Court dismissed the appeal. Ms. Ali’s evidence about her expenses was simply not credible.
Ali v. R. - TCC: Court rejects evidence that all expense documentation lostPlus >

Sood v. R. - FC: Federal Court will not direct Minister to enforce an illegal tax settlement

25 août 2015 By Bill Innes

Précis: In February of 2014 Mr. Sood reached a settlement with CRA that would have permitted him a portion of an Ontario New Housing Rebate on a home he agreed to purchase in June of 2007 (he took possession in June of 2011). Subsequent to the date of the settlement CRA discovered that the Ontario New Housing Rebate plan did not take effect until July 1, 2010 and therefore Mr. Sood was not entitled to any Ontario Rebate. CRA refused to go ahead with the settlement and Mr. Sood sued in the Federal Court to enforce it.
Sood v. R. - FC: Federal Court will not direct Minister to enforce an illegal tax settlementPlus >

Mason v. R. - FC: Court will not restrain GST collection efforts of CRA

25 août 2015 By Bill Innes

Précis: Mr. Mason was an accountant. He had been assessed for arrears in GST. He appealed to the Tax Court but was only partially successful. He appealed that decision to the Federal Court of Appeal. While the Tax Court appeal was underway CRA launched collection proceedings against him, sending third party demands to his clients.
Mason v. R. - FC: Court will not restrain GST collection efforts of CRAPlus >

Gleig v. R. - TCC: Taxpayers denied deductions for unregistered tax shelter

24 août 2015 By Bill Innes

Précis: Mr. Gleig and other appellants purchased interests in a mineral claim with a 25% up front payment. They claimed Canadian Resource Expenditures (“CRE”) on the full agreed price. CRA denied their claim on the basis that the program was an unregistered tax shelter or, in the alternative, a sham.
Gleig v. R. - TCC: Taxpayers denied deductions for unregistered tax shelterPlus >

Fettes v. R. - TCC: Decrease in strike price disentitled taxpayer to stock option tax deduction

24 août 2015 By Bill Innes

Précis: Mr. Fettes was an employee of the Culligan Group and in 2004 he was granted an option to acquire shares of Culligan Ltd. at $10.00 each, the then fair market value of the shares. In 2008 he exercised his option but the strike price was reduced to $2.02 for some reason. This was below the then fair market value of $8.05. The Minister assessed a benefit on the difference between $8.05 and $2.02. Mr. Fettes appealed on the basis that he was entitled to a reduction of 50% of the amount of the benefit as a result of the application of paragraph 110.1(1)(d) of the Income Tax Act (the “Act”).
Fettes v. R. - TCC: Decrease in strike price disentitled taxpayer to stock option tax deductionPlus >

Désir v. R. - TCC: Taxpayer denied extension of time to file notice of objection

21 août 2015 By Bill Innes

Précis: The taxpayer failed to file a GST notice of objection in a timely manner. He filed an application with the Minister for an extension of the time to file his notice of objection. That application was filed within the statutory time limits. The Minister refused his application and advised the taxpayer that he had 30 days to file an application in the Tax Court to extend the time to file a notice of objection.
Désir v. R. - TCC: Taxpayer denied extension of time to file notice of objectionPlus >

Archives - 2015

Archives