Capital Vision Inc. v. MNR, 2003 DTC 5054 (FCTD)

Before going on to find that the Minister had failed to establish that he had issued requirements under s. 231.2(1) for a disclosure of the names of third parties only in connection with his audit of the corporate applicant rather than in relation to the third parties, Heneghan J. stated (at p. 5065) that:

"The Minister, not the taxpayer, bears the burden of complying with section 231.2."

The taxpayer, which was involved in facilitating donations of artwork by third parties, blanked out the names of the third parties when information about the transactions was requested by the Minister ("CCRA"). When CCRA applied to the Court for a requirement to receive information about the unnamed persons, the applicants exercised their rights pursuant to s. 231.2(5) to seek judicial review of the requirements. CCRA then side-stepped this process by indicating it would not enforce the old requirements and instead applied for new requirements indicating that it was seeking the information about the third parties in connection only with its audit of the applicants.

Heneghan J. found (at p. 5065) that:

"The Minister, not the taxpayer, bears the burden of complying with section 231.2"

and (at p. 5066) that:

"The Minister here has failed to objectively establish that he had fairly stated his purpose in issuing the new requirements."

Accordingly, the new requirements were invalid for failure to comply with ss.231.2(2) and (3).