Stone,
J.A.:-This
is
an
appeal
from
a
judgment
of
the
Tax
Court
of
Canada
which
dismissed
appeals
against
assessments
made
under
paragraphs
60(b)
and
(c)
of
the
Income
Tax
Act
R.S.C.
1952,
c.
148,
as
amended
for
the
1984
and
1985
taxation
years.
By
the
terms
of
a
Judgment
of
the
Supreme
Court
of
Ontario
of
February
25,
1981
giving
effect
to
Minutes
of
Settlement
between
the
appellant
and
his
wife,
the
appellant
had
the
option
of
paying
his
wife
the
sum
of
$208,000
on
April
1,
1981.
Alternatively,
the
appellant
was
allowed
to
make
five
annual
payments
with
interest
at
ten
per
cent
per
annum
after
April
1,
1981
or
of
making
monthly
payments
of
$3,789.87
over
48
months
from
April
1981
to
March
1985
including
a
ten
per
cent
interest
component.
He
chose
this
last
option.
In
his
reasons,
the
learned
Tax
Court
Judge
offered
this
analysis:
The
Minutes
of
Settlement
stated
in
paragraph
1
that
the
parties
were
making
a
’’clean
break".
The
wife
agreed
in
paragraph
8
to
provide
a
release
if
requested.
The
Judgment
(Ex.
A-2)
was
simply
a
Court
Order
which
adopted
the
terms
of
the
Minutes
of
Settlement.
The
words
"maintenance”,
"support”
or
"alimony”
do
not
appear
in
the
Minutes
of
Settlement
or
in
the
Judgment
except
with
respect
to
the
$450
per
month
for
the
daughter
Polly.
Any
portion
of
the
$208,000
paid
after
April
1,
1981
was
subject
to
interest
at
ten
per
cent
per
annum
whether
in
annual
or
monthly
instalments.
And
the
agreement
survived
the
parties
indicating
that
the
wife
(or
her
estate)
was
to
receive
the
full
amount
of
$208,000
either
at
one
time
(by
April
1,
1981)
or
over
the
next
four
years.
If
a
single
payment
of
$208,000
on
April
1,
1981
would
have
been
a
capital
amount,
as
I
think
it
would,
how
can
the
character
of
that
amount
change
from
capital
to
alimony
or
maintenance
just
because
it
is
stretched
over
four
years
or
48
months?
Despite
Mr.
Hood’s
able
argument,
we
are
all
of
the
view,
substantially
for
the
reasons
given
by
the
Tax
Court
Judge,
that
the
appeal
must
be
dismissed.
Accordingly,
the
appeal
will
be
dismissed
with
costs.
Appeal
dismissed.
Email this Content