Date: 19990809
Docket: 98-71-GST-I
BETWEEN:
ASPIRE MANAGEMENT REALTY LTD.,
Appellant,
and
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN,
Respondent.
Reasons for Judgment
O'Connor, J.T.C.C.
[1] This appeal was heard on July 27, 1999 at Edmonton,
Alberta pursuant to the Informal Procedure of this Court.
Testimony was given by L. Hazelaar, the agent for the Appellant,
a Chartered Accountant, and by Mohan Maharaj the principal of the
Appellant company. Testimony was also given by Catherine Chang,
an appeals officer with Revenue Canada.
FACTS:
[2] The basic facts are as follows:
1. By Notice of Assessment number 00010105370, dated February
28, 1997, for the period January 1, 1993 to December 31, 1996,
the Minister of National Revenue (the "Minister")
assessed the Appellant net tax (GST) in the amount of $29,008.48,
interest in the amount of $3,723.20 and penalty in the amount of
$3,928.91.
2. The Appellant objected to Notice of Assessment number
00010105370 by Notice of Objection, dated April 23, 1997.
3. The Minister partly allowed the objection by a Notice of
Decision and Notice of Reassessment 10BT-115145112, both dated
October 9, 1997 by reducing the net tax collectible to the amount
of $22,478.14 (Total GST of $45,587.47 less ITCs of $23,109.33)
with interest and penalty in the amounts of $1,906.82 and
$2,006.40, respectively. There is no dispute as to the amount of
ITCs.
[3] The Appellant was engaged in a commercial activity
consisting of the management of real estate. The real estate so
managed with very minor exceptions consisted of residential real
estate.
[4] The Appellant was registered for purposes of the Excise
Tax Act ("Act") since January 1, 1991 under
registration number 100294156.
[5] According to the Respondent, during the relevant period
the Appellant made total taxable supplies in the following
amounts:
Year End
Sept 30
|
Taxable Supplies
|
GST Collectible
|
GST Reported
|
GST Unreported
|
1993
|
$201,951.00
(x 9/12)
|
$10,602.43
|
$8,198.91
|
$2,403.52
|
1994
|
$242,385.00
|
$16,966.95
|
$10,197.49
|
$6,769.46
|
1995
|
$180,578.00
|
$12,640.46
|
$9,920.76
|
$2,719.70
|
1996
|
$67,000.00
|
$4,690.00
|
$278.32
|
$4,411.68
|
Oct,Nov & Dec 1996
|
$9,823.29
|
$687.63
|
$332.65
|
$354.98
|
TOTALS
|
|
$45,587.47
|
$28,928.13
|
16,659.34
|
[6] The Appellant contests these figures and submits that the
correct figures are as follows:
|
Taxable Supplies
|
GST
|
GST Reported
|
GST Unreported
|
1993 (Jan -
Sept 30)
|
$123,786.63
|
$8,664.78
|
$8,198.91
|
$465.87
|
1994 fiscal
year
|
$189,411.22
|
$13,258.78
|
$10,197.49
|
$3,061.29
|
1995 fiscal
year
|
$137,576.40
|
$9,630.34
|
$9,920.76
|
($290.42)
|
1996 fiscal
year
|
$6,444.76
|
$451.12
|
$278.32
|
$172.80
|
Oct,Nov & Dec 1996
|
$0.00
|
$0.00
|
$359.98
|
($359.98)
|
TOTALS
|
|
$32,005.02
|
$28,955.46
|
$3,049.56
|
[7] The Appellant did not file all of its GST returns on time
as required by section 228 of the Act.
[8] According to the Respondent the Appellant failed to
maintain sufficient books and records to allow a proper
verification and determination of the Appellant's liability
obligations under the Act but according to the
representative of the Appellant there were sufficient books and
records and had the auditor examined same this dispute would
never have gotten to this stage. Mr. Maharaj reviewed Exhibit A-1
in detail. In essence it consists of a record of bank deposits
made during the period in question with notations that some of
the amounts deposited in the bank were in respect of non-taxable
supplies. The Appellant maintains that the items consisted of
non-taxable supplies because they were in certain cases loans
made by shareholders to the Appellant, rental and other items
which flowed through the bank account, i.e., were received and
deposited by the Appellant but later paid out to the owners of
the properties. Other items consisted of renovations, mistakes,
insurance payments amounts flowed through the company's
account but ultimately advanced to Aspire International, the main
company in the group, set up fees and other items.
[9] The Respondent maintains that because the books and
records were insufficient some other method had to be employed by
the Minister in establishing the assessment. Consequently, the
financial statements submitted by the Appellant were used to
determine the gross income. The auditor and the appeals officer
also considered other methods of determining the gross income but
finally determined that the most appropriate method was to rely
on the financial statements. Consequently, the figures that
appear above representing the Respondent's submissions as to
what were taxable supplies are taken from the Appellant's
financial statements.
[10] The Appellant attempted to explain that the financial
statements were not reliable because some items included in gross
revenue were not taxable supplies as detailed more fully in
Exhibit A-1. The Appellant contends that the figures submitted
above by the Appellant and based upon Exhibit A-1 are the correct
figures. The Respondent submits that the Appellant was obliged
under section 286(4) of the Excise Tax Act to keep proper
records and books and since the Appellant did not do so the
Respondent was entitled to assess on the basis of the financial
statements filed with the Appellant's income tax returns.
ANALYSIS AND DECISION:
[11] I accept the credibility of Mr. Maharaj. His detailed
analysis of Exhibit A-1 established that he was fully familiar
with the GST legislation and his references to the financial
statements not truly reflecting the taxable supplies by the
Appellant were understood. The evidence as to what books and
records were available to the auditor and the appeals officer was
contradictory. Even though the records may not have been up to
the standard required by Revenue Canada there were definitely
records maintained and made available.
[12] Consequently, although I find no fault with the approach
of Revenue Canada, now that all of the figures are in, I find on
a balance of probabilities, that the position of the Appellant is
correct. Consequently, the appeal is allowed to the following
extent, namely, that the matter is referred back to the Minister
of National Revenue for reconsideration and reassessment on the
basis that the GST collectible is $3,049.56. The interest and
penalties are to be adjusted on this basis.
Signed at Ottawa, Canada this 9th day of August,
1999.
"T.P. O'Connor"
J.T.C.C.