Docket: 2007-4141(IT)I
BETWEEN:
RÉAL BERNIER,
Appellant,
and
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN,
Respondent.
[OFFICIAL ENGLISH TRANSLATION]
Appeal
heard on June 17, 2008, at Montréal, Quebec
Before: The Honourable
Justice Robert J. Hogan
Appearances:
|
For the Appellant:
|
The Appellant himself
|
|
|
|
|
Counsel for the Respondent:
|
Sarom Bahk
|
____________________________________________________________________
JUDGMENT
The appeal from the assessment made under
the Income Tax Act for the 2006 taxation year is dismissed in
accordance with the attached Reasons for Judgment.
Signed at Ottawa, Canada, this
16th day of September 2008.
"Robert J. Hogan"
Translation
certified true
on this 14th day
of November 2008.
Brian McCordick,
Translator
Citation: 2008 TCC 379
Date: 20080916
Docket: 2007-4141(IT)I
BETWEEN:
RÉAL BERNIER,
Appellant,
and
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN,
Respondent.
[OFFICIAL ENGLISH
TRANSLATION]
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
(Delivered orally from the bench on June 17,
2008, at Montréal, Quebec, and amended for greater clarity and precision)
Hogan J.
[1] Réal Bernier is appealing an income tax
assessment for his 2006 taxation year. Under section 18.1 of the Tax
Court of Canada Act, the informal procedure applies to his appeal.
[2] At the conclusion of the trial, I dismissed
the taxpayer's appeal. For the parties' benefit, I consider it appropriate to
put my reasons down in writing now.
[3] The issue arises out of the fact that the
Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) charged the Appellant a total of $120.21 in
instalment interest.
[4] The facts set out in paragraphs 3 to 6 of
the Reply to the Notice of Appeal are as follows:
[TRANSLATION]
3. The Minister initially assessed the Appellant
for the 2006 taxation year on May 22, 2007.
4. On or about June 5, 2007, the Appellant
served on the Minister his objection to the assessment dated May 22, 2007,
for the 2006 taxation year.
5. In reply to the Appellant's objection to the
assessment dated May 22, 2007, for the 2006 taxation year, the
Minister confirmed the assessment on July 18, 2007.
6. In making and confirming the assessment of
May 22, 2007, for the 2006 taxation year, the Minister relied on the
following assumptions of fact:
(a) In his income tax return for his
2006 taxation year, the Appellant reported the following amounts:
|
Description
|
Amount
|
|
Quebec Pension Plan
|
$6,263
|
|
Other pension
|
$19,774
|
|
Interest/investment income
|
$1,451
|
|
RRSP* income
|
$10,000
|
|
Net business income
|
$2,039
|
|
TOTAL INCOME
|
$39,527
|
|
*Registered retirement savings plan
|
(b) In his income tax return for his
2005 taxation year, the Appellant reported the following amounts:
|
Description
|
Amount
|
|
Quebec Pension Plan
|
$6,122
|
|
Interest/investment
income
|
$1,392
|
|
RRSP* income
|
$7,000
|
|
Other income
|
$18,743
|
|
Net business income
|
$5,473
|
|
TOTAL INCOME
|
$38,730
|
|
*Registered retirement savings plan
|
(c) In his income tax return
for his 2004 taxation year, the Appellant reported the following amounts:
|
Description
|
Amount
|
|
Quebec
Pension Plan
|
$6,025
|
|
Other
pension
|
$18,813
|
|
RRSP* income
|
$10,000
|
|
Net
business income
|
$863
|
|
TOTAL
INCOME
|
$35,701
|
|
*Registered retirement savings plan
|
(d) On May 22, 2007, the Appellant's tax
account for his 2006 taxation year broke down as follows:
|
Description
|
Amount
|
|
Federal tax
|
$4,552.99
|
|
Refundable abatement
|
( $751.24)
|
|
Tax deductions
|
($1,953.90)
|
(e) On May 11, 2006, the Appellant's tax
account for his 2005 taxation year broke down as follows:
|
Description
|
Amount
|
|
Federal tax
|
$4,478.35
|
|
Refundable abatement
|
( $738.93)
|
|
Tax deductions
|
($1,623.85)
|
(f) On June 9, 2005, the Appellant's tax
account for his 2004 taxation year broke down as follows:
|
Description
|
Amount
|
|
Federal tax
|
$4,206.56
|
|
Refundable abatement
|
( $694.08)
|
|
Tax deductions
|
($1,945.34)
|
(g) The Appellant was required to make tax
instalment payments for the 2004 and 2005 taxation years;
(h) During the
2006 taxation year, the Appellant was required to pay the following
amounts quarterly, that is, on March 15, June 15, September 15
and December 15:
|
Period
|
Amount
|
|
March 15
|
$392.00
|
|
June 15
|
$392.00
|
|
September
15
|
$601.88
|
|
December
15
|
$461.96
|
(i) The Appellant did not make his instalment
payments for his 2006 taxation year;
(j) Instalment reminders were sent to the Appellant
on the required dates to inform him of the payments he had to make for the
2006 taxation year;
(k) Since the Appellant did not make any tax
instalment payments for the 2006 taxation year, the Minister claimed
$120.21 in instalment interest;
(l) As well, since the Appellant did not pay his
tax balance until May 24, 2007, even though he was required to pay it on
April 30, 2007, the Minister claimed $10.70 in arrears interest.
Issues
[5] The issues are whether, for the
2006 taxation year:
(a) the Appellant was required
to make tax instalment payments;
(b) the Minister was right
to charge the Appellant $120.21 in instalment interest;
(c) the Minister was right
to charge the Appellant $10.70 in arrears interest;
(d) the Minister correctly
calculated the instalment and arrears interest.
[6] With regard to the interest,
subsection 161(1) of the Income Tax Act (ITA) is clear and
unambiguous. The Court has no jurisdiction to cancel or reduce interest
properly charged under subsection 161(2) of the ITA.
[7] The Appellant did not provide any valid reason
to challenge the charging of interest by the CRA. As his only argument, he
referred to sections 146 and 147 of the ITA without establishing
their relevance. For these reasons, the Court dismisses the appeal.
Signed at Ottawa, Canada, this 16th day of September 2008.
"Robert J. Hogan"
Translation certified true
on this 14th day of November 2008.
Brian McCordick, Translator
Email this Content