Tax – Income tax – Administration and enforcement
Stand-alone assessment issued against taxpayer was made under s. 160 of Income Tax Act on January 18, 2017. Taxpayer purportedly mailed objection in April and sent further notice of objection in May 2017. May objection was identical to April objection but for three omitted elements. Coincident with objection made in June, Canada Revenue Agency sent director rejection letter concerning May objection. Taxpayer applied for extension of time to file notice of objection concerning assessment. Application dismissed. May objection filed by taxpayer was invalidated by delivery date, which was some 39 days beyond 90-day period, and rejection was completely correct. June objection was out of time irrespective of its purported personal delivery. It was clear from record that no application for extension of time to file notice of objection was served on Minister of National Revenue within one year of expiration of last day for serving notice of objections. Director’s assertion regarding date on which he mailed April objection was not probable. Finding was based in evaluation of his testimony for inconsistency, uncertainty and likeliness given surrounding circumstances. Based on credibility analysis undertaken by Court in respect of April objection, it need not be speculated on whether April objection was created and there were plentiful enough reasons to conclude it was not mailed on April 17, 2017.
M.R.E. Developments v. The Queen (2019), 2019 CarswellNat 3575, 2019 CarswellNat 3813, 2019 TCC 151, 2019 CCI 151, Randall S. Bocock J. (T.C.C.).
Case Law is a weekly summary of notable civil and criminal court decisions by the Supreme Court of Canada, the Federal Court of Canada and all Ontario courts. These cases may be found online in WestlawNext Canada. To subscribe, please visit store.thomsonreuters.ca
