Dube,
J.:—This
application
for
judicial
review
under
section
18.1
of
the
Federal
Court
Act,
R.S.C.
1985,
c.
F-7,
is
for
an
order
directing
the
Minister
of
National
Revenue
to
allow
the
applicant
taxpayer
to
carryforward
his
construction
costs
for
the
1988
taxation
year
to
its
1990
taxation
year.
In
a
nutshell,
the
Minister
reassessed
the
applicant's
1988
taxpayer's
taxation
year
on
June
22,
1992
and
disallowed
the
taxpayer's
loss
from
the
Claridge
Holdings
No.
1
Partnership
in
the
amount
of
$2,354,724.
The
normal
procedure
under
the
Income
Tax
Act,
R.S.C.
1952,
c.
148
(am.
S.C.
1970-71-72,
c.
63)
(the
"Act")
for
a
taxpayer
to
challenge
an
assessment
is
to
file
a
notice
of
objection
under
subsection
165(1)
which
the
taxpayer
did
for
its
1988
taxation
year
on
July
13,
1992.
Subsection
169(1)
provides
for
an
appeal
procedure
to
the
Tax
Court
of
Canada.
The
right
to
appeal
is
triggered
either
by
a
confirmation
by
the
Minister
or
the
passage
of
90
days
from
service
of
the
notice
of
objection
when
the
Minister
has
neither
vacated
nor
confirmed
the
assessment
or
reassessed
it.
The
Minister
has
yet
to
issue
either
a
notice
or
reassessment
or
a
notice
of
confirmation
in
response
to
the
applicant’s
notice
of
objection.
So
as
not
to
offend
its
partners
in
the
Claridge
Holdings
No.
1
Partnership
who
have
not
as
yet
been
assessed,
the
applicant
is
attempting
to
move
the
Minister
to
act
favourably
in
his
case
by
way
of
a
judicial
review
and
not
by
way
of
appeal
to
the
Tax
Court
of
Canada.
In
my
view
the
Income
Tax
Act
provides
a
complete
code
prescribing
the
procedure
to
be
followed
in
such
cases.
A
Minister’s
assessment
cannot
be
challenged
by
way
of
judicial
review.
Moreover,
in
the
instant
case,
the
applicant
has
never
made
any
payment
on
account
of
its
tax
liability
for
its
1988
taxation
year.
Thus,
there
are
no
amounts
for
the
Minister
to
refund.
If
the
applicant
is
seeking
a
refund
with
respect
to
its
1990
taxation
year,
the
applicant
has
failed
to
file
a
notice
of
objection
to
dispute
the
Minister’s
assessment
with
respect
to
that
year.
Consequently,
this
application
for
judicial
review
is
dismissed.
Application
dismissed.
Email this Content