[OFFICIAL ENGLISH
TRANSLATION]
Date:
20021018
Docket:
2002-3290(IT)APP
BETWEEN:
YVES
LAMARRE,
Applicant,
and
HER
MAJESTY THE QUEEN,
Respondent.
REASONS FOR ORDER
Lamarre
Proulx, J.T.C.C.
[1] This is an application under subsection 166.2(1)
of the Income Tax Act ("the Act") to grant an
application to extend the time for serving a Notice of Objection to a
reassessment.
[2] The reassessment is
dated December 27, 2001,
and is for the 2000 taxation year. According to the respondent's Reply, the
time limit under subsection 165(1) of the Act expired on
April 30, 2002. (I accept this date even though it appears to me to
be one month later.)
[3] On July 15, 2002, the applicant sent the Minister
of National Revenue ("the Minister") an application to extend the
time for serving a Notice of Objection to the above-mentioned reassessment. On
July 26, 2002, the Minister served on the applicant a refusal to
extend the time. The present application to grant the application to the Minister
to extend the time was filed on August 22, 2002.
[4] This application, signed by
Marie Claire Faulkner, C.A., for the applicant, reads as follows:
[TRANSLATION]
...
Subject: Extension of time, 2000
247 597 685
I am writing in reply to your letter dated
July 26, 2002. I am applying to the Tax Court of Canada for a review of my 2000
file. I am convinced that my claim for a credit for support payments made to
Carmelle Melançon for the 2000 year is justified. My rights were explained to
me when I filed my 2001 return.
I hope that this letter will be considered
and that my file will be reviewed as a result.
...
[5] The applicant explained that he received a
letter from the Canada Customs and Revenue Agency ("the CCRA") dated
October 18, 2001; this letter was adduced by the Respondent as
Exhibit I‑2.
[6] This letter reads as follows:
[TRANSLATION]
Subject: Your 2000 income tax return
We regularly implement review programs that
play an important role in the self-assessment taxation system. We are writing
in order to inform you that we have selected your return for review. However,
in order to verify the accuracy of your assessment, we need more information.
|
|
Amount Subject
to Review
|
|
Other deductions
|
$ 4,003.00
|
|
Support payments
|
$10,028.00
|
OTHER DEDUCTIONS
In support of the deduction you claimed:
- for legal costs, please provide us with
receipts or documents specifying the amounts paid, the date of payment, and the
reason the costs were paid. If the costs incurred include an amount to obtain a
court order for child or spousal support, we need a copy of the order and a
copy of a statement from your lawyer specifying the portion of the costs
incurred for child or spousal support.
SUPPORT PAYMENTS
In support of the deduction you claimed,
please provide the following information:
- receipts confirming all child or spousal
support payments made during the year. If you send us photocopies of cashed
cheques, copy both sides of each cheque. If you paid the support to a
provincial agency, please provide us with one of the following documents:
copies of the cashed cheques, a bank statement, a statement of account from
your employer, receipts from the beneficiary, or a letter from the agency. The
documents must clearly identify the beneficiary, the payor, and the amounts of
the support payments.
Please send us the requested information
within 30 days following the date of this letter, using the enclosed
label. Be sure to write the reference number of the letter and your Social
Insurance Number on your documents. If you do not respond to our request, we
shall have to make a reassessment on the basis of the information we have
available.
If you have any questions about this
letter, please contact one of our officers in the Processing Review Section,
Jonquière Tax Centre. The telephone number is (418) 699‑0735,
extension 3200, for local calls, or 1‑888‑699‑0735,
extension 3200, for long-distance calls. You may also contact our office
by facsimile at (418) 699‑0730.
[7] The applicant stated that he brought this
letter to Ms. Faulkner, the accountant, and asked her to send out the
required documents.
[8] On December 27, 2001, a Notice of Reassessment was
sent to the applicant (Exhibit I‑1). I quote two paragraphs from the
[translation] “explanation of changes and other important information”:
...
Since we have not received a response to
our recent letter, we have reviewed your return. If you send us the necessary
information, we shall re-examine your return in order to determine whether it
may be adjusted.
We allow your deduction for support
payments. However, according to our files, the maximum deductible amount for
which you are eligible is $3,033. You may request a reassessment by submitting
receipts in support of the total amount of support payments you made.
...
[9] The applicant stated that he brought the
Notice of Reassessment to the accountant and that she was surprised. She
apparently told him that she had sent the required documents to the CCRA. The
applicant apparently then asked her to take care of the Notice of Reassessment.
[10] The Notice of
Objection signed by the
applicant was received by the CCRA on June 11, 2002 (Exhibit I-3).
[11] Exhibit I‑4 is a letter from the
CCRA dated June 25, 2002, informing the applicant that the Notice of
Objection was served late and providing the usual information about making an
application to extend the time.
[12] Exhibit I‑5 is the present
application to extend the time. It is dated July 15, 2002, and is
signed by the applicant. It is typed and appears to have been prepared at the
accountant's office. It reads as follows:
[TRANSLATION]
...
Subject: Extension of time for Notice of
Objection
247 597 685
To the Chief of Appeals:
I hereby apply for an extension of time for
my 2000 Notice of Objection.
Because of circumstances beyond my control,
I was unable to serve the said Notice of Objection within the prescribed time.
I firmly believe that my application is in order and relevant. I did not know
that for the 2000 year I could claim a credit for support payments made to
Carmelle Melançon, 240 158 931.
Please take this letter into consideration.
Yours truly,
...
[13] By registered letter
dated July 26, 2002
(Exhibit I-6), the CCRA refused the application to extend the time, for the
following reasons:
[TRANSLATION]
...
Subject: Application to
extend time for serving objection –
2000 taxation year
We are writing to inform you that we are
unable to grant your application for the reasons outlined below.
You have not demonstrated that during the
time limit for serving an objection:
- you were unable to act or to instruct
another to act in your name
OR
- you had a bona fide intention to
object to the assessment.
If you disagree with this decision, you may
apply to the Tax Court of Canada for reconsideration. The Court must receive
your application at one of the addresses indicated below within 90 days
following the date this letter was mailed.
...
Conclusion
[14] I have reproduced
the letter dated October 18, 2001,
in its entirety (in paragraph 6 of these Reasons) because, in my opinion,
it explains clearly the documents that must be sent. As well, if the taxpayer
needs further explanations, the letter indicates toll-free telephone numbers.
[15] I have also
reproduced the letter from the CCRA dated July 26, 2002, in its entirety
(in paragraph 13 of these Reasons) because this letter explains the
reasons for the refusal.
[16] The application to grant the application to
extend the time has been reproduced above, in paragraph 4 of these Reasons. It
should be noted that the application does not explain why, during the time
limit for serving the Notice of Objection, the applicant was unable to act or
to instruct another to act in his name. The same shortcoming existed in the
application to the Minister, reproduced in paragraph 13 of these Reasons.
[17] Nor does the application set out any of the facts stated
by the applicant at the hearing. These facts are as follows: (1) following the
letter dated October 18, 2001, the applicant had instructed
Ms. Faulkner to send the required documents to the CCRA; (2) following the
assessment, the applicant went to see Ms. Faulkner and asked her what was
happening and she apparently answered that she did not understand since she had
sent everything; and (3) the applicant purportedly then instructed
Ms. Faulkner to serve the Notice of Objection to the assessment, which
apparently she did not do.
[18] We must also take
into account the fact that the accountant was not present at the hearing.
[19] On the balance of
the evidence adduced, it is not possible to believe the applicant's version of
the facts or that he acted with diligence. The application to extend the time
that was served by the accountant does not corroborate the applicant's
statements at all. I have no evidence before me that the applicant instructed
the accountant to act within the time prescribed. If that were the case and it
was indeed the accountant who did not act within the prescribed time, she
should have been present at the hearing to explain why, although instructed to
act, she was unable to do so within the time limit. As well, the evidence
adduced shows a lack of follow-up by the applicant that is the result of either
carelessness or lack of intent to appeal within the prescribed time.
[20] The application must therefore be dismissed.
Signed at Ottawa, Canada, this 18th day of
October 2002.
J.T.C.C.
Email this Content