Date:
20121101
Docket: A-342-10
Citation: 2012 FCA 277
CORAM: BLAIS
C.J.
SHARLOW J.A.
MAINVILLE
J.A.
BETWEEN:
ABLE
ENTERPRISES LTD.
Appellant
and
HER
MAJESTY THE QUEEN
Respondent
Heard
at Vancouver, British Columbia, on November 1, 2012.
Judgment
delivered from the Bench at Vancouver, British Columbia, on November 1, 2012.
REASONS
FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT BY: SHARLOW J.A.
Date:
20121101
Docket: A-342-10
Citation: 2012 FCA 277
CORAM: BLAIS
C.J.
SHARLOW J.A.
MAINVILLE
J.A.
BETWEEN:
ABLE
ENTERPRISES LTD.
Appellant
and
HER
MAJESTY THE QUEEN
Respondent
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
OF THE COURT
(Delivered
from the Bench at Vancouver, British Columbia, on November 1, 2012)
SHARLOW J.A.
[1]
Able
Enterprises Ltd. is appealing the judgment of the Tax Court of Canada in an
appeal under the informal procedure of that Court, dismissing an appeal of an
assessment of goods and services tax (GST) under the Excise Tax Act,
R.S.C. 1985, c. E-15, for the period March 1, 2002 to February 29, 2004 (2010
TCC 352). The assessments imposed a liability on Able Enterprises Ltd. to remit
GST pursuant to section 173 of the Excise Tax Act on the amount of
benefits conferred on its sole shareholder, Mr. Babich, in 2003 and 2004.
[2]
Mr.
Babich had appealed to the Tax Court the reassessments that included the
taxable benefits in his income. Almost all of the issues raised by Able
Enterprises Ltd. in its GST appeal are the same as those that were raised in
Mr. Babich’s income tax appeal. Mr. Babich’s income tax appeal was unsuccessful
in the Tax Court, as was the GST appeal of Able Enterprises Ltd.
[3]
In
this Court, Mr. Babich’s appeal of the Tax Court judgment in his income tax
appeal was heard immediately before this appeal. In the income tax appeal, all
of the issues common to both appeals were determined in the Crown’s favour.
Those same determinations must stand for this GST appeal.
[4]
The
only issue that is unique to the GST appeal is the treatment by the Minister of
a particular amount of $12,624.41 that, according Mr. Babich, should have been
credited to the GST account of Able Enterprises Ltd., rather than its employee
source deduction account. The judge declined to consider this issue because she
concluded that it was a collection matter that was outside her statutory jurisdiction.
Mr. Babich challenges that conclusion. However, we are not persuaded that the
judge erred in law or in fact when she declined on jurisdictional grounds to
deal with that issue.
[5]
For
these reasons, the appeal will be dismissed with costs.
"K. Sharlow"
FEDERAL COURT OF
APPEAL
NAMES OF COUNSEL AND
SOLICITORS OF RECORD
DOCKET: A-342-10
STYLE OF CAUSE: Able
Enterprises Ltd. v.
Her Majesty the Queen
PLACE OF HEARING: Vancouver, British Columbia
DATE OF HEARING: November
1, 2012
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT BLAIS C.J.
OF THE COURT BY: SHARLOW
J.A.
MAINVILLE J.A.
DELIVERED FROM THE
BENCH BY: SHARLOW
J.A.
APPEARANCES:
Earl
Babich
|
FOR
THE APPLICANT
|
Selena
Sit
|
FOR
THE RESPONDENT
|
SOLICITORS
OF RECORD:
N/A
|
FOR THE APPLICANT
|
Myles J. Kirvan
Deputy Attorney General of Canada
|
FOR THE RESPONDENT
|