Date:
20080917
Docket: A-434-06
A-432-06
A-433-06
Citation: 2008 FCA 273
CORAM: DÉCARY J.A.
BLAIS J.A.
RYER J.A.
A-434-06
BETWEEN:
KIM H. KNITTLE
Appellant
and
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
Respondent
A-432-06
BETWEEN:
ANTHONY KNITTLE
Appellant
and
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
Respondent
A-433-06
BETWEEN:
KIM H. KNITTLE, O/A DATA SECURED
Appellant
and
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
Respondent
Heard at Vancouver, British Columbia, on September 17, 2008.
Judgment delivered from the Bench at Vancouver, British Columbia, on September 17, 2008.
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT BY:
RYER J.A.
Date:
20080917
Docket A-434-06
A-432-06
A-433-06
Citation: 2008
FCA 273
CORAM: DÉCARY
J.A.
BLAIS
J.A.
RYER
J.A.
A-434-06
BETWEEN:
KIM H. KNITTLE
Appellant
and
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
Respondent
A-432-06
BETWEEN:
ANTHONY KNITTLE
Appellant
and
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
Respondent
A-433-06
BETWEEN:
KIM H. KNITTLE, O/A DATA SECURED
Appellant
and
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
Respondent
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE
COURT
(Delivered
from the Bench at Vancouver, British Columbia, on September 17, 2008)
RYER J.A.
[1]
Three
appeals (A-432-06, A-433-06 and A-434-06) were taken from the decision of
McArthur J. of the Tax Court of Canada (2006 TCC 393) in which he upheld
reassessments of income tax, pursuant to the Income Tax Act, R.S.C.
1985, c. 1 (5th Supp.) (the ITA), against Mrs. Kim Knittle for her 2000
taxation year and her husband Mr. Anthony Knittle for his 1999 and 2000
taxation years and a reassessment of goods and services tax, pursuant to the Excise
Tax Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. E-15 (the ETA), against Mrs. Knittle operating as
Data Secured, for her 1999 and 2000 taxation years. These appeals were heard
together, pursuant to an order of Létourneau J.A. dated November 17, 2006.
[2]
The
income tax reassessments were based upon the Minister’s assertion that Mr. and
Mrs. Knittle had under-reported their income and had claimed as business
expenses a number of non-allowable amounts. These matters in turn formed the
basis of the GST reassessment, in which the Minister asserted that there had
been an under-reporting of GST collectible and an excessive claim for input tax
credits.
[3]
The
Tax Court Judge dismissed all of the appeals against the reassessments. In
doing so, he agreed with the assumptions made by the Minister in the replies to
the Notices of Appeal against the reassessments because he found no contrary
evidence. As a result, he dismissed all of the appeals against the
reassessments.
[4]
To
succeed in this appeal, the appellants must establish that the Tax Court Judge
made an incorrect interpretation of an applicable law or a palpable or
overriding error with respect to a factual finding.
[5]
Despite
the arguments of counsel for the appellants, we have not been persuaded that
the Tax Court Judge erred in law or with respect to any factual finding.
Accordingly, his decision must stand and the appeals will be dismissed, with
one set of costs.
"C.
Michael Ryer"
FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL
NAMES OF COUNSEL AND
SOLICITORS OF RECORD
DOCKET: A-434-06
A-432-06
A-433-06
STYLE OF CAUSE: Kim
Knittle v. HMQ
Anthony
Knittle v. HMQ
Kim
H. Knittle, O/A DATA SECURED v. HMQ
PLACE OF HEARING: Vancouver, British Columbia
DATE OF HEARING: September 17, 2008
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE
COURT BY: DÉCARY J.A.
BLAIS J.A.
RYER
J.A.
DELIVERED FROM THE BENCH BY: RYER J.A.
APPEARANCES:
|
Jason D. Jakubec
|
FOR
THE APPELLANTS
|
|
Pavanjit Mahil
Michael
Taylor
|
FOR
THE RESPONDENT
|
SOLICITORS
OF RECORD:
|
Watson Goepel Maledy LLP
Vancouver, B.C.
|
FOR THE APPELLANTS
|
|
John H. Sims Q.C.
Deputy
Attorney General of Canada
|
FOR THE RESPONDENT
|
Email this Content