Bodnarchuk v. The Queen, docket 97-3023(IT)I (Informal Procedure)

97-3023(IT)I

BETWEEN:

PATRICIA BODNARCHUK,

Appellant,

and

HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN,

Respondent.

Appeals heard on September 25, 1998 at Halifax, Nova Scotia, by

the Honourable Judge D.W. Beaubier

Appearances

For the Appellant:                      The Appellant herself

Counsel for the Respondent:      Marcel Prévost

JUDGMENT

          The appeals from the reassessments made under the Income Tax Act for the 1993 and 1994 taxation years are dismissed in accordance with the attached Reasons for Judgment.

Signed at Ottawa, Canada this 28^th day of September 1998.

"D.W. Beaubier"

J.T.C.C.

Date: 19980929

Docket: 97-3023(IT)I

BETWEEN:

PATRICIA BODNARCHUK,

Appellant,

and

HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN,

Respondent.

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

Beaubier, J.T.C.C.

[1]      This appeal pursuant to the Informal Procedure was heard at Halifax, Nova Scotia on September 25, 1998. The Appellant was the only witness.

[2]      The assumptions in the Reply to the Notice of Appeal read:

8.      In so assessing the Appellant for the 1993 and 1994 taxation years, the Minister made the following assumptions of fact:

a) the Appellant received $16,056.00 in 1993 and $16,248.00 in 1994 from her former spouse, William Bodnarchuk, as an allowance payable on a periodic basis for the maintenance of the children of the taxpayer;

b) at the time the payment was received and throughout the remainder of the year the Appellant was living apart from and was separated pursuant to a divorce from William Bodnarchuk;

c) the amounts were received pursuant to a decree, order or judgment of a competent tribunal or under a written agreement;

d) the amounts received by the Appellant as maintenance from William Bodnarchuk in 1993 and 1994 were properly included in income for those years.

[3]      The Appellant admitted that the assumptions were true and that she received the money in both years. However, she stated that the money was to benefit her children and was used for that purpose and therefore was not her money.

[4]      The assessment is a matter of principle for Ms. Bodnarchuk.

[5]      Paragraph 56(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act for 1993 and 1994 reads:

56 (1)    Without restricting the generality of section 3, there shall be included in computing the income of a taxpayer for a taxation year,

...

(c) an amount received by the taxpayer in the year as an allowance payable on a periodic basis for the maintenance of the taxpayer, children of the taxpayer or both the taxpayer and the children if

(i)    at the time the amount was received and throughout the remainder of the year the taxpayer was living separate and apart from the person who was required to make the payment,

(ii) the person who was required to make the payment is the natural parent of a child of the taxpayer, and

(iii) the amount was received under an order made by a competent tribunal in accordance with the laws of a province; ...

[6]      The Appellant admitted that all of the conditions described in paragraph 56(1)(c) were fulfilled in both 1993 and 1994.

[7]      For these reasons, the appeals are dismissed.

Signed at Ottawa, Canada this 28^th day of September 1998.

"D.W. Beaubier"

J.T.C.C.

COURT FILE NO.:                             97-3023(IT)I

STYLE OF CAUSE:                           Patricia Bodnarchuk and The Queen

PLACE OF HEARING:                      Halifax, Nova Scotia

DATE OF HEARING:                        September 25, 1998

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT BY:     The Honourable Judge D.W. Beaubier

DATE OF JUDGMENT:                     September 28, 1998

APPEARANCES:

For the Appellant:                      The Appellant herself

Counsel for the Respondent:      Marcel Prévost

COUNSEL OF RECORD:

For the Appellant:

Name:                

Firm:                 

For the Respondent:                  Morris Rosenberg

                                                Deputy Attorney General of Canada

                                                          Ottawa, Canada