Tax Court of Canada


Tax

Income tax

Administration and enforcement

No object was required where notices of reassessments were void

Taxpayer’s husband died in 1995 and taxpayer’s health declined steadily until her own death in October 2004. Taxpayer had been diagnosed with aggressive, metastatic breast cancer in fall of 2002. Tax returns for 1998, 2001 and 2002 taxation years were filed in 2003 and reassessed by Minister of National Revenue in 2003. Tax return for 1999 taxation year was filed in July or August 2000 and reassessed months later while tax return for 2000 taxation year was filed in April 2001 and reassessed in June 2001. Taxpayer brought application for extension of time to file notice of objection for taxation years 1998-2002 inclusive. Application dismissed concerning 1999 and 2000 taxation years and unnecessary for 1998, 2001 and 2002 taxation years. There was insufficient evidence to find that taxpayer lacked mental capacity before her diagnosis date. It was concluded that taxpayer had capacity when she executed and filed her 1999 and 2000 tax returns. Beyond contemporaneous documentary medical evidence concerning period after diagnosis date, balance of factual witnesses indicated that taxpayer was in confused and depressed state from her diagnosis date until time of her death. Finding was made, on balance, that taxpayer from and after her diagnosis date lacked mental capacity to execute or did not execute and file 2003 filings. Notices of reassessments responsive to those filings were void and accordingly, no objection was required to void reassessments. Previously subsisting assessments for those years would be revived and were now operative.

Ntakos Estate v. The Queen (2018), 2018 CarswellNat 7018, 2018 TCC 224, Randall S. Bocock J. (T.C.C.).


cover image

DIGITAL EDITION

Subscribers get early and easy access to Law Times.

Law Times Poll


The Law Society of Ontario is in the midst of a major overhaul of the role of paralegals in family law — and a proposal on the issue could become an imminent issue for the regulator’s newly elected benchers. Do you agree with widening the scope of family law matters that paralegals can address?
RESULTS ❯