Howard v. R., [1997] 3 C.T.C. 2641

Rowe T.C.J.:

1 The Appellant appealed with respect to his 1995 taxation year. The Appellant filed his return of income for the 1995 taxation year, reporting income from employment and registered retirement savings plan income, then calculated his non-refundable tax credit and a carrying charge and interest expense of $58.85, and calculated thereafter his net federal tax owing in the sum of $6,534.06.

2 The Minister of National Revenue assessed the Appellant's return as filed, and on July 5th, 1996 issued Notice of Assessment to that effect. The Appellant objected to the July 5th, 1996 assessment of his 1995 income tax return by way of a Notice of Objection which was postmarked July 12th, 1996. The Minister responded to that Notice of Objection by issuing a Notification of Confirmation of the assessment, and that Notification of Confirmation was dated September 18th, 1996. The Minister's Confirmation of the previous assessment was again based on the return of income submitted by the Appellant which had been assessed exactly as filed.

3 Then on September 25th, 1996 the Appellant filed a Notice of Appeal and thereafter sent somewhere between 50 and 60 pieces of correspondence, some many-paged and others containing other material, purporting to relate to his appeal. The Notice of Appeal itself and the subsequent material submitted by the Appellant, in my view, does not disclose any ground of appeal.

4 Now, in matters, especially informal appeals, there is no need for a precise form of pleadings and generally speaking the nature of the mandate in these matters is to permit a wide latitude in terms of the material before the court, so that the actual litigable point can be dealt with effectively.

5 Section 18.15(1) of the Tax Court of Canada Act reads as follows:

An appeal referred to in section 18 shall be made in writing and shall set out, in general terms, the reasons for the appeal and the relevant facts, but no special form of pleadings is required unless the Act out of which the appeal arises expressly provides otherwise.

6 It must be kept in mind that the Minister assessed the Appellant's return of income for the 1995 taxation year on the basis of the information provided by the Appellant and on the basis of the calculations made by the Appellant, which were accurate and conformed with the law and the amount of tax owing for that year in accordance with the established rates.

7 Having regard once again to the wording of section 18.15(1), it can be seen that it is mandatory that an Appellant set out, albeit in general terms, the reasons for the appeal and the facts in support of that position. Then counsel for the Minister can file a Reply to the Notice of Appeal setting forth various assumptions of fact relied upon by the Minister, together with pleading the specific provisions of the Income Tax Act, so that there is then a basis for that particular assessment having been issued. Again, the Notice of Appeal filed by the Appellant does not provide any basis for the Minister to respond other than to rely again on the Notification of Confirmation of an assessment which accepted without variation the statement of taxable financial affairs as submitted by the Appellant in his return of income.

8 What then is the purpose of an appeal? The purpose of an appeal is to call into question the validity of the Minister's assessment of income tax owing with respect to a particular income tax year. It is not to pursue some further and wider agenda, or to purport to use it as a vehicle to coalesce grievances against the Canadian establishment or the various institutions comprised in that larger generic entity.

9 In the case of International Tax Services Ltd. v. Minister of National Revenue (1970), 70 D.T.C. 1758 (Can. Tax App. Bd.), the Tax Appeal Board, as it then was, heard a case and the judgment was delivered by the presiding judicial officer, Mr. W.O. Davis, Q.C. At page 1760 Mr. Davis said this:

After having heard the arguments of counsel for the Minister and appellant's agent, it is clear to me that both appeals herein must be quashed. The appellant has failed completely to disclose any ground upon which these appeals might be sustained. The assessment in respect of the taxation year 1967 is based entirely upon the income as reported by the appellant through its agent, who certified that the appellant's return, including schedules and statements, had been examined by him and was a true, correct and complete return as of the date on which it was compiled. The same comment can be made with respect to the 1969 return and assessments.

Both notices of appeal fail completely to disclose any ground for appeal from the assessments to income tax to which the appellant purports to take exception.

If at some future date within the four-year limitation for re-assessment further information comes to the attention of the appellant or the Minister which might justify al alteration in the tax payable for these years, it is always open to the Minister to re-assess and, if any disagreement arises in connection therewith, a new objection, and if necessary a new appeal, may be launched at the appropriate times therefor.

For the above reasons, the appeals with respect to the appellant's 1967 and 1979 taxation years are quashed, as there is no ground for disturbing the Minister's assessment as they now stand.

10 In this particular instance the material before me is practically identical to the situation dealt with by Mr. Davis of the Tax Appeal Board in the International Tax Services Ltd. case that was just quoted.

11 Notwithstanding the fundamental mandate of informality and the desire to provide unrestricted, generally unformalized access by often unrepresented taxpayers before the Tax Court, there still has to be a litigable, arguable, appealable point from which it can be seen there is something that was before the Minister upon which the Minister proceeded in a fashion which it now can be demonstrated was dealt with improperly and incorrectly by him.

12 This is not the case in which there was an attempt to submit an amended income tax return. This is an instance in which clearly, purely and simply the Minister dealt with the return as filed and the wealth of material provided thereafter does not disclose any litigable, appealable, valid point of appeal.

13 Accordingly, therefore, with respect to the Appellant's Notice of Appeal for the 1995 taxation year, for the reasons that I have just stated, there is no valid ground for appeal or any reason for disturbing the Minister's assessment, and as a consequence that Notice of Appeal is declared to be an invalid Notice of Appeal and as a consequence it is hereby quashed.