|
Docket: 2007-3592(EI)APP
|
|
BETWEEN:
|
|
AMARJIT SINGH GREWAL,
|
|
Applicant,
|
|
and
|
|
|
|
THE MINISTER OF NATIONAL REVENUE,
|
|
Respondent.
|
____________________________________________________________________
Application heard on November 26, 2007 at Vancouver, British Columbia
|
Before: The
Honourable Justice L.M. Little
|
|
|
|
Appearances:
|
|
For the
Applicant:
|
The Applicant himself
|
|
Counsel for the
Respondent:
|
Max Matas
|
____________________________________________________________________
JUDGMENT
Upon application under subsection 103(1) of
the Employment Insurance Act for an Order extending the time within
which an appeal may be instituted;
And upon reading the Affidavit of Bernie
Keays filed;
And upon hearing what was alleged by the
parties;
The Application to extend the time is
dismissed, without costs, in accordance with the attached Reasons for Judgment.
Signed at Vancouver, British Columbia, this 30th day of November 2007.
Little J.
|
Citation: 2007TCC716
|
|
Date: 20071130
|
|
Docket: 2007-3592(EI)APP
|
|
BETWEEN:
|
|
AMARJIT SINGH GREWAL,
|
|
Applicant,
|
|
and
|
|
|
|
THE MINISTER OF NATIONAL REVENUE,
|
|
Respondent.
|
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
Little J.
A. Statement
of Facts:
[1] The
Applicant was employed by B.C. Labour Contracting Ltd. (“Contracting”) in the 2001
taxation year.
[2] By
letter dated October 27, 2006 the Minister of National Revenue
(the “Minister”) determined that the Applicant had 426 insurable hours and
associated insurable earnings of $5,851.20 with Contracting for the period of June 1,
2001 to August 31, 2001.
[3] In
the letter dated October 27, 2006 the Minister also determined that the
Applicant was not employed in insurable earnings with Contracting for the
period of April 16, 2001 to May 31, 2001 and September 1, 2001 to September 29,
2001 as the employment did not meet the requirements of paragraph 5(1)(a) of
the Employment Insurance Act (the “Act”).
[4] The
Applicant did not file a Notice of Appeal to the decision of the Minister dated
October 27, 2006.
[5] On
August 14, 2007 the Applicant filed an Application in the Tax Court to extend
the time within which to file a Notice of Appeal.
[6] The
Minister maintains that the Application for an extension of time was not made
within 90 days after the expiration of the time otherwise limited by the Act
for appealing the decision of the Minister.
B. Issue
[7] Does
the Tax Court have the authority to extend the time within which a Notice of
Appeal may be filed to a decision of the Minister?
C. Analysis and Decision
[8] Subsection 5.(1) of the Act reads as follows:
Commencement of Appeal
5.(1) An appeal by an appellant
from a decision on an appeal to the Minister shall be instituted within the
time period set out in subsection 103(1) of the Act, which is 90 days after the
decision is communicated to the appellant, or within such longer time as the
Court may allow on application made to it within 90 days after the
expiration of those 90 days.
[9] Subsection
5.(2) reads as follows:
(2) Where a decision referred to
in subsection (1) is communicated by mail, the date of communication is the
date it is mailed and, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, the date of
mailing is the date specified on the decision.
[10] Section 6 provides as follows:
Extension of Time
6.(1) An application for an order
extending the time within which an appeal may be instituted may be in the form
set out in Schedule 6.
(2) An application under subsection
(1) shall be made by filing with the Registrar, in the same manner as appeals
are filed under section 5, three copies of the application accompanied by three
copies of the notice of appeal.
(3) No application shall be granted
under this section to an applicant unless
(a) the application is made
within 90 days after the expiration of 90 days after the day on which the
Minister communicated his or her decision to the applicant; and
(b) the applicant
demonstrates that
(i) within the initial
90-day period specified in paragraph (a), the applicant
(A)
was
unable to act or to instruct another to act in the applicant’s name, or
(B)
had
a good faith intention to appeal,
(ii) given the reasons set
out in the application and the circumstances of the case, it would be just and
equitable to grant the application,
(iii) the application was
made as soon as circumstances permitted it to be made, and
(iv) There are reasonable grounds for
appealing the decision.
[11] It will be noted that subsection 6(3) of the Act
provides that an Application for an extension of time to file a Notice of
Appeal must be made within 90 days after the expiration of the first 90
days.
[12] In this situation
the timelines are as follows:
Date of Minister’s Decision: October 27, 2006.
Deadline for Filing Notice of
Appeal:
90 days after October 27, 2006 is January 25, 2007.
Deadline for Filing Application to
Extend the Time: April 25, 2007.
[13] The Applicant did
not file his Application to extend the time until August 14, 2007, i.e.
approximately 3 ½ months after the deadline.
[14] The Applicant also
confirmed during the hearing that he was living at 32982 Harris Road, Abbotsford, B.C. V4X
1B8 at the time the decision was mailed.
[15] In the Act, Parliament
has provided for a specific time limit of 180 days within which a
taxpayer may file an Application to extend the time to file a Notice of Appeal.
I do not have the authority to extend the time if the Application is made after
the 180 day period.
[16] The Application to
extend the time is dismissed without costs.
Signed at Vancouver, British Columbia, this 30th day of November 2007.
Little
J.
Email this Content