Taylor,
TCJ
[ORALLY]:—I
have
prepared
notes
in
respect
of
the
application
of
Dennis
A
Demeria
for
an
extension
of
time
within
which
to
file
notices
of
objection
for
his
1978,
1979
and
1980
taxation
years.
This
is
an
application
by
Dennis
A
Demeria,
made
pursuant
to
section
167
of
the
Income
Tax
Act.
to
extend
time
within
which
notices
of
objection
may
be
served
on
the
Minister
of
National
Revenue
in
respect
of
1978,
1979
and
1980
notices
of
reassessment.
Notices
of
reassessment
were
mailed
to
the
applicant
on
or
about
December
16,
1982,
to
his
last
known
address
at
630-9th
Avenue
North,
in
Saskatoon.
Sometime
in
December,
1982,
the
applicant
separated
from
his
wife
and
moved
out
of
his
marital
residence
at
that
address
to
various
places
in
Saskatoon
and
subsequently
for
several
weeks
to
Vancouver.
As
early
as
June,
1983,
the
applicant
knew
that
Revenue
Canada
was
proposing
to
reassess
him
on
the
basis
of
the
actual
assessments
that
he
wishes
to
object
to.
The
applicant
acknowledged
that
he
never
kept
proper
records
and
was
generally
negligent
in
his
affairs
and
especially
as
related
to
tax
matters.
He
testified
that
when
he
left
his
marital
residence
he
believed
his
wife
threw
away
his
mail
during
the
time
of
his
separation
and
he
presumed
this
included
the
notices
of
reassessment
sent
to
him
in
December
of
1982.
He
reconciled
with
his
wife
in
March
of
1983.
His
wife
and
one
of
his
children
were
hospitalized
in
March
of
1983
and
he
was
at
home
in
March
taking
care
of
his
other
children
and
subsequently
his
wife
and
child,
upon
their
return
from
the
hospital.
In
June
of
1983
he
learned
of
the
assessment
from
an
official
of
Revenue
Canada
and
tried
to
get
information
from
Revenue
Canada,
but
nothing
was
forthcoming
until
September,
1983,
when
he
requested
his
lawyer
to
get
various
information
from
Revenue
Canada.
The
information
he
wanted
was
copies
of
his
returns
for
1978,
1979,
and
1980,
and
the
explanation
of
the
assessments.
It
was
not
disputed,
nor
was
it
challenged
in
cross-examination,
that
he
requested
this
information
from
Revenue
Canada.
Subsection
167(1)
states
that
the
application
should
be
granted
if
the
circumstances
of
the
case
are
such
that
it
would
be
just
and
equitable
to
do
so.
Subsection
167(5)
adds
certain
criteria
to
be
considered
stating
that
no
order
should
be
made
under
subsection
(1)
unless
inter
alia
the
application
was
brought
as
soon
as
circumstances
permitted
it
to
be
brought.
Counsel
for
the
Minister
of
National
Revenue
said
that,
based
on
equity,
the
application
should
be
granted
but
it
would
not
be
just
to
do
so
since
the
applicant
was
negligent,
to
say
the
least,
in
handling
his
affairs
and
that
he
did
not
bring
the
application
as
soon
as
circumstances
permitted
it
to
be
brought.
The
Court
does
find
that
Mr
Demeria
was
negligent.
In
his
own
words
his
tax
records
were
very
disorganized
and
he
did
not
know
and
does
not
know,
it
seems
to
me,
what
is
or
was
happening.
This
Court
cannot
tolerate
a
taxpayer’s
complete
disregard
of
his
obligations
under
the
Income
Tax
Act.
On
the
other
hand,
this
Court
also
requires
a
complete,
open
and
frank
relationship
between
the
taxing
authority
and
the
taxed
individual.
The
applicant
did
request
documentation
from
Revenue
Canada
as
far
back
as
June,
1983
according
to
the
evidence
this
morning,
when
he
learned
of
the
assessments
and
only
when
his
lawyer
interceded
did
he
obtain
satisfaction
from
Revenue
Canada.
While
the
applicant
could
have
brought
the
application
sooner
than
he
did,
at
the
same
time
Revenue
Canada
could
have
forwarded
him
the
material
he
requested
earlier
than
it
did
so.
Revenue
Canada
should
have
sent
him
the
information
without
the
necessity
of
the
applicant
going
to
a
lawyer
asking
the
lawyer
to
write
such
correspondence
to
Revenue
Canada.
Accordingly
it
is
just
that
the
application
be
granted
and
it
is
hereby
ordered
that
the
time
for
objecting
to
the
notices
of
reassessment
for
1978,
1979
and
1980,
be
extended
to
May
15,
1984.
Application
granted.
Email this Content