The CRA and the Crown like to say (or at least sometimes they act as if), in the objection and Tax Court appeal process, all that matters is whether the assessment in issue is correct. Justice J.E. Hershfield, in Wood v. The Queen, 2008 TCC 105, begged to differ.
Limitation Periods
The following article appeared in the latest edition of the Hamilton Law Association Law Journal.
The Income Tax Act (Canada) (the “Act”) contains numerous limitation periods that affect when the Canada Revenue Agency (the “CRA”) can issue an assessment to a taxpayer and when a taxpayer can and cannot dispute such an assessment. Understanding these limitation periods is an important pre-requisite for advising clients about a wide variety of legal problems, including, for example, the expiry period for representations and warranties in a share purchase agreement.
Procedure
In Corsi v. The Queen, 2008 TCC 472, the CRA sent a 160 assessment to the taxpayer by registered mail in June, 2004, to her home address, which was not the address the CRA had on file for the taxpayer. For whatever reason, the taxpayer didn’t pick up the mail, and it was returned to the CRA. The CRA did nothing more with the assessment, but some time thereafter CRA Collections started calling the taxpayer. This was the first she heard about the assessment. The CRA then mailed a copy of the assessment to the taxpayer’s accountant in October, 2005, more than one year and 90 days after the first assessment was supposedly sent.
Nil Assessments
A taxpayer cannot object to or appeal from a nil assessment. The courts have held that a piece of paper that says you don’t owe any tax is not an assessment for the purposes of the Income Tax Act even though it might have that word printed at the top of it.
Tax Court Jurisdiction Again
In a February post, I noted that the Tax Court does not have jurisdiction over an assessment that relates only to Ontario taxes. In Hiscock v. Canada, 2007 FCA 382, the Court held that the Tax Court did have jurisdiction to determine whether a taxpayer was a resident of Nova Scotia.
Lawyers!
Subsection 30(2) of the Tax Court of Canada Rules (General Procedure) provides that “where a party to a proceeding is not an individual, that party shall be represented by counsel except with leave of the Court and on any conditions that it may determine.”
Tax Court Jurisdiction
The Tax Court has said it before, and it will say it again: it has no jurisdiction to hear an appeal from a “nil assessment” (an assessment where no federal taxes are payable) or from an assessment that relates only to Ontario taxes. See Baluyot v. The Queen, 2007 TCC 682.
Anchor Pointe
The Supreme Court has dismissed with costs the taxpayer’s application for leave to appeal from the Federal Court of Appeal’s decision in The Queen v. Anchor Pointe Energy Ltd., 2007 FCA 188.
Anchor Pointe allowed
The Federal Court of Appeal, in The Queen v. Anchor Pointe Energy Ltd., 2007 FCA 188, has reversed Chief Justice Bowman’s decision in 2006 TCC 424. I discuss the latter decision here.
Redeemer Goes to Ottawa
The Supreme Court of Canada today granted Redeemer Foundation’s “application for leave to appeal with costs to the applicant in any event of the cause.” The plot thickens. For my comments on this case, search for “Redeemer” on this…