Docket: A-1-16
Citation:
2016 FCA 293
|
CORAM:
|
STRATAS J.A.
WEBB J.A.
WOODS J.A.
|
|
BETWEEN:
|
|
BENJAMIN OKEKE
|
|
Appellant
|
|
and
|
|
HER MAJESTY THE
QUEEN
|
|
Respondent
|
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
(Delivered from the Bench at Toronto, Ontario, on November 21,
2016).
WOODS J.A.
[1]
The appellant, Benjamin Okeke, appeals from a
judgment of the Tax Court of Canada (2015 TCC 301) which upheld the disallowance
of a portion of charitable donation tax credits claimed by him pursuant to
section 118.1 of the Income Tax Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. 1 (5th
Supp.) (the Act).
[2]
In Mr. Okeke’s income tax return for the 2008
taxation year, he claimed a tax credit for charitable donations on the basis
that he made donations to two charities totalling $9,800. The two charities
were referred to as Revival Time Ministries Int. and Operation Save Canada
Teenagers.
[3]
In reassessing this taxation year, the Minister
of National Revenue allowed the claim but only to the extent that the donations
were evidenced by cheques. The total amount of the cheques was only $800. The
remainder of the donations ($9,000) were purportedly made by way of cash
donations. The Minister disallowed the total of the amounts claimed as cash
donations.
[4]
In the Tax Court, Justice Valerie Miller (the
trial judge) dismissed the appeal on two grounds. First, she concluded that the
evidence did not support that cash donations were made. Second, she found that
the tax receipts for these donations did not satisfy the requirements of section
3501 of the Income Tax Regulations, C.R.C. c. 945.
[5]
In our view, the trial judge made no reviewable
error, here palpable and overriding error, in her conclusion that Mr. Okeke did
not sufficiently establish that the purported cash donations were made. There
is ample support for this conclusion.
[6]
In this Court, Mr. Okeke submits that the cash
donations are supported by letters written by the founder of the charities, Daniel
Mokwe.
[7]
The trial judge found that the details in Mr.
Mokwe’s letters were not reliable. Mr. Okeke submits that the trial judge made
an error in this conclusion by relying on a fact which was not supported by the
evidence that the charities did not have records for 2008 at the relevant time.
[8]
The problem with this submission is that even if
there was not clear evidence on the existence of such records, there was ample
other evidence to support the trial judge’s finding that statements by Mr. Mokwe
were not reliable.
[9]
In particular, the evidence reveals that the
charities had falsified bank statements that were given to the CRA. In
addition, the charities issued donation receipts for amounts that wildly
exceeded the charities’ bank deposits. In this regard, the bank deposits for several
years were for an aggregate amount of only $12,000 and yet the donation
receipts issued by the charities for the same period were for a total of $7.8
million.
[10]
Accordingly, there is ample support for the
trial judge’s conclusion that statements by Mr. Mokwe are not reliable.
[11]
In light of our conclusion that the trial judge
made no reviewable error concerning the $9,000 donations, it is not necessary
that we consider the second issue which is whether the tax receipts are
deficient. We express no comment on it.
[12]
Finally, Mr. Okeke submits that it is not his
fault that the charities falsified information, and he submits that the CRA were
also at fault in not alerting him to problems with the charities in a timely
manner.
[13]
These submissions do not assist Mr. Okeke
because he has the onus of proof. Even if the allegations regarding wrongdoing
by the CRA were true, this would not be a sufficient ground to invalidate the
assessment and allow the tax credit (Main Rehabilitation Co. Ltd. v. The
Queen, 2004 FCA 403, 2004 D.T.C. 6762).
[14]
We conclude that the appeal will be dismissed,
with costs to the respondent.
"Judith M. Woods"
Email this Content