Blogue

Bemco Confectionary v. R. - FCA: Interlocutory appeal dismissed - no reversible error

12 février 2016 By Bill Innes

Précis: This is an appeal from an interlocutory decision of the Tax Court blogged earlier on this site. The appeals in question involve roughly $30 million in GST on tobacco sales. In the Tax Court the taxpayer moved to strike large portions of the Crown’s assumptions contained in its Replies. The same motion was taken in each of 5 GST appeals. All of the appeals involved a single issue: Did the appellant sell tobacco products to Status Indians on Reserves or did it misrepresent the identity of its customers? The taxpayer sought to strike paragraphs of the Crown’s assumptions for various reasons:
Bemco Confectionary v. R. - FCA: Interlocutory appeal dismissed - no reversible errorPlus >

Coombs v. R. - FC: Judicial review applications struck - again

12 février 2016 By Bill Innes

Précis: Mr. Coombs is a frequent litigant before the Federal Court. Three judicial review applications arising out of previously, and frequently, litigated issues were struck as bereft of any possibility of success.
Coombs v. R. - FC: Judicial review applications struck - again Plus >

Marzen Artistic v. R. - FCA: Transfer pricing appeal dismissed

11 février 2016 By Bill Innes

Précis: This was an appeal from a Tax Court decision blogged earlier on this site. The case involved transfer pricing, more specifically the disallowance of more than $7,000,000 in fees paid in 2000 and 2001 as well as the imposition of a penalty in excess of $500,000 for the 2001 taxation year. The Tax Court allowed the appeal, but only to the extent of permitting the deduction of fees in the amount of US$32,500 paid to Starline Windows Inc. (“SWI”) in each of 2000 and 2001. Costs were awarded to the respondent.
Marzen Artistic v. R. - FCA: Transfer pricing appeal dismissedPlus >

R. v. Callidus Capital - FC: Deemed trust under the ETA does not survive bankruptcy

11 février 2016 By Bill Innes

Précis: This is a decision on a point of law arising out of an action by the Crown to collect unpaid GST from a secured creditor of a bankrupt taxpayer. Callidus Capital Corporation, the secured creditor, had received, prior to the bankruptcy, proceeds from the assets of the tax debtor that were deemed to be held in trust under the provisions of the Excise Tax Act (“ETA”). The Federal Court held that the deemed trust did not survive the assignment in bankruptcy. Costs of $2,600 were awarded to Callidus on the application.
R. v. Callidus Capital - FC: Deemed trust under the ETA does not survive bankruptcyPlus >

Feng v. R. - FC: No judicial review of objection extension application filed 4 ½ years late

10 février 2016 By Bill Innes

Précis: The taxpayer was assessed for GST in 2009. In 2015 she wrote the Minister asking for an extension of time to file a notice of objection. The request was refused because it was outside the time limits for applying for an extension under the Excise Tax Act. Ms. Feng applied to the Federal Court to review that decision of the Minister. The Crown moved to strike the application on the basis that it was bereft of any possibility of success. The Prothonotary struck the application as an abuse of process and an impermissible collateral attack on the Minister’s decision. The Crown was awarded costs of $750 inclusive of disbursements and taxes.
Feng v. R. - FC: No judicial review of objection extension application filed 4 ½ years latePlus >

Eshan v. R. - TCC: Small cleaning service skewered by CRA

10 février 2016 By Bill Innes

Précis: Mr. Ehsan ran a small cleaning service and did odd jobs on the side. CRA did an indirect audit and increased his income by $16,504 and $1,940 in 2008 and 2009, respectively. It also disallowed expenses totalling $12,494 (48%) and $18,202 (65%) in the same respective years. Before the Tax Court he was represented by his daughter who does not appear to have been a lawyer or accountant. Mr. Ehsan had to testify through an interpreter. At the commencement of trial the Crown made a number of concessions:
Eshan v. R. - TCC: Small cleaning service skewered by CRAPlus >

Ramlal v. R. - TCC: Gross negligence penalty affirmed - fictitious business loss

8 février 2016 By Bill Innes

Précis: Another fictitious business loss case where the only issue was the imposition of a gross negligence penalty (the amount of the penalty does not appear in the decision). The appeal was dismissed with costs.
Ramlal v. R. - TCC: Gross negligence penalty affirmed - fictitious business lossPlus >

Mallette v. R. - TCC: Gross negligence penalty affirmed - fictitious business loss

8 février 2016 By Bill Innes

Précis: Another fictitious business loss case where the only issue was the imposition of a gross negligence penalty (the amount of the penalty does not appear in the decision). The appeal was dismissed with costs.
Mallette v. R. - TCC: Gross negligence penalty affirmed - fictitious business lossPlus >

Marra v. R. - TCC: Director’s resignation served on corporation’s lawyer effective

5 février 2016 By Bill Innes

Précis: Ms. Marra was a director of Sani-Clean Systems Incorporated (“Sani-Clean”) and, as such, was assessed for unremitted GST of Sani-Clean and unremitted amounts under the Income Tax Act. She appealed to the Tax Court which accepted her evidence that she had given her resignation to Claudio Polsinelli, who acted as the lawyer for Sani-Clean, more than two years prior to the date of the assessment. The Crown took the position that the resignation was ineffective.
Marra v. R. - TCC: Director’s resignation served on corporation’s lawyer effectivePlus >

Mcdonald v. R. - FCA: No reversible error in Tax Court - appeal dismissed from bench

5 février 2016 By Bill Innes

Précis: This was an appeal from a decision of Rip J. in the Tax Court who upheld a subsection 160(1) transferee assessment against Ms. Mcdonald on the basis that she had received funds from her husband at a time when he owed income tax and that she hid those funds in a new account she opened. The appeal was dismissed from the bench in three paragraphs; costs were awarded to the Crown of $1,000, all-inclusive.
Mcdonald v. R. - FCA: No reversible error in Tax Court - appeal dismissed from benchPlus >

Archives - 2016

Archives