Mahoney
J:—This
is
an
application
under
Rule
474
for
a
preliminary
determination
of
a
question
of
law:
whether,
in
the
circumstances,
the
reassessment
of
the
plaintiff’s
1976
income
tax
return
was
made
within
the
time
prescribed
by
subsection
152(4)
of
the
Income
Tax
Act.
By
definition,
“assessment”
includes
reassessment
and
subsection
152(2)
requires
that
the
Minister
“send
a
notice
of
assessment
to
the
person
by
whom
the
return
was
filed”.
It
is
well
established
that
“an
assessment
is
not
made
until
the
Minister
has
completed
his
statutory
duties
as
an
assessor
by
giving
the
prescribed
notice”.*
There
is
no
question
here
of
any
waiver,
misrepresentation
or
fraud
on
the
plaintiff’s
part.
The
reassessment
was
required,
by
subsection
152(4),
to
be
made
within
four
years
of
July
29,
1977.
There
was
a
postal
strike
in
Canada
between
June
30
and
August
10,
1981.
The
notice
of
reassessment,
dated
July
24,
1981,
was
mailed
at
the
United
States
Post
Office
in
Pembina,
North
Dakota,
addressed
to
the
plaintiff
at
his
address
in
Bartlesville,
Oklahoma,
on
July
29,
1981,
He
received
it
August
3.
The
law
requires
that
the
notice
of
reassessment
be
sent,
not
that
it
be
received,
within
the
prescribed
time.
It
further
requires
that
it
be
sent,
not
that
it
be
mailed.
Accordingly,
I
find
immaterial
the
provisions
of
the
Post
Office
Act*
relied
on
by
the
plaintiff
in
support
of
the
proposition
that
the
mailing
here
was
not,
in
law,
a
mailing.
The
mailing
of
a
notice
of
reassessment
at
a
United
States
Post
Office,
properly
addressed
to
an
addressee
in
the
United
States,
does,
in
my
view,
meet
the
requirement
of
the
Act
that
the
notice
be
sent
to
that
addressee.
Such
mailing,
on
July
29,
1981,
was
within
four
years
of
July
29,
1977.
The
reassessment
was
made
in
time.
ORDER
IT
IS
ORDERED
AND
DECLARED
THAT
the
reassessment
of
the
plaintiff’s
1976
income
tax
return,
evidenced
by
notice
of
reassessment
no
935749,
was
made
within
the
time
prescribed
therefor
by
subsection
152(4)
of
the
Income
Tax
Act.
Costs
in
the
cause.