Rattai – Federal Court of Appeal finds that misrepresentation can be established by the taxpayer’s admission rather than by a copy of his false return

In reversing the Tax Court in its finding that a gross negligence penalty was not payable by the taxpayer because his return that was in evidence was incomplete, Monaghan JA noted that the taxpayer had admitted to the misrepresentation (claiming fictitious losses) in his Notice of Appeal. She agreed with the Crown’s position that while the Crown “bears the burden of establishing the relevant facts on a balance of probabilities, neither the Act nor the jurisprudence dictates that a copy of the return is required to meet that burden.”

Neal Armstrong. Summaries of Canada v. Rattai, 2022 FCA 106 under s. 163(2) and General Concepts – Evidence.