Date: 20010719
Docket: 2000-3825-IT-I
BETWEEN:
JACK BLUSTEIN,
Appellant,
and
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN,
Respondent.
Reasons for Judgment
Beaubier, J.T.C.C.
[1]
This Informal Procedure appeal was heard at Toronto, Ontario on
July 16, 2001. The Appellant's son and agent David Blustein
was the only witness. At the conclusion of his evidence, the
Respondent moved that the appeal be dismissed because, while the
1995 assessment is appealed, in fact the appeal concerns interest
assessed on account of taxes levied for earlier years.
[2]
The original amount of interest assessed was the sum of
$22,980.77 first described to the Appellant in a Statement of
Account (Exhibit A-5) attached to a Notice of Assessment dated
February 28, 1997, which related to the taxation years 1981,
1985, 1987, 1982, 1983, 1992, 1984, 1989, 1988, 1990 and 1991. It
stated that if the total amount payable was paid in full by March
18, 1997, no additional interest would be charged. The Appellant
paid the whole amount except the $22,980.77 interest.
[3]
Previously, on August 21, 1996 and September 17, 1997 counsel for
both the Respondent and the Appellant had signed a Consent to
Reassessment (Exhibit A-2) respecting 1981, 1982, 1983,
1984, 1985 and 1987 to 1992. It also agreed to deductions for
1981 to 1992 of $172,599.00 as set out in Exhibit "A"
thereto and a further $81,844.00 to be applied to the earlier
years. Finally, in paragraph (viii), the Appellant waived his
right to appeal or object to his 1981 to 1985 and 1987 to 1992
taxation years.
[4]
This document was drawn and executed by lawyers for both parties
and terminated their litigation then in progress. It did not
refer to the matter of interest on account of the tax for the
years settled by the Consent.
[5]
In the Court's view Exhibit A-2, the Consent, must be read
within its four corners respecting the years it settled. It
terminated any appeal that might be raised for those years.
Furthermore it did not deal with the possible interest to be
levied on the taxes in dispute.
[6]
The Appellant's Notice of Appeal itself appeals the 1995 year
and any subsequent years pertaining to the tax arrears and
penalties, in its opening paragraph.
[7]
Exhibit A-12 is the Notice of Reassessment for 1995 which is the
subject of the appeal. It refers to a previous account balance of
$27,235.30 which is the interest of $22,980.77 compounded to the
date of the 1995 assessment, namely May 10, 1999. As the Federal
Court of Appeal stated in Ruffolo v. The Queen, 2000
C.T.C. 242, such a figure is not a component of the 1995
assessment.
[8]
In these circumstances the Respondent's motion is granted and
the appeal is dismissed.
Signed at Toronto, Ontario this 19th day of July 2000.
"D.W. Beaubier"
J.T.C.C.
COURT FILE
NO.:
2000-3825(IT)I
STYLE OF
CAUSE:
Jack Blustein and The Queen
PLACE OF
HEARING:
Toronto, Ontario
DATE OF
HEARING:
July 16, 2001
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT BY: The
Honourable Judge D.W. Beaubier
DATE OF
JUDGMENT:
July 19, 2001
APPEARANCES:
Counsel for the Appellant: David T. Blustein
Counsel for the
Respondent:
Meghan Castle
COUNSEL OF RECORD:
For the
Appellant:
Name:
David T. Blustein
Thornhill, Ontario
For the
Respondent:
Morris Rosenberg
Deputy Attorney General of Canada
Ottawa, Canada
2000-3825(IT)I
BETWEEN:
JACK BLUSTEIN,
Appellant,
and
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN,
Respondent.
Appeal heard on July 16, 2001 at Toronto,
Ontario, by
the Honourable Judge D.W. Beaubier
Appearances
Counsel for the
Appellant:
Gary Blustein
Counsel for the
Respondent:
Meghan Castle
JUDGMENT
The
appeal from the assessment made under the Income Tax Act
for the 1995 taxation year is dismissed in accordance with the
attached Reasons for Judgment.
Signed at Toronto, Ontario, this 19th day of July 2001.
J.T.C.C.
Email this Content