|
Docket: 2004-3343(IT)I
|
|
BETWEEN:
|
|
BENEDETTE CHIBULUZO,
|
|
Appellant,
|
|
and
|
|
|
|
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN,
|
|
Respondent.
|
Appeal heard on March 10, 2005 at Ottawa, Canada
|
Before: The Honourable
Justice G. Sheridan
|
|
|
|
Appearances:
|
|
|
|
For the Appellant:
|
The Appellant herself
|
|
|
|
Counsel for the Respondent:
|
Nicolas Simard
|
JUDGMENT
The appeal from the reassessment made under the Income
Tax Act for the 2000 taxation year is allowed and the reassessment is referred back to the Minister
of National Revenue for reconsideration and reassessment on the basis that Ms. Chibuluzo
was a married person living separate and apart from her spouse and is entitled
to claim an "equivalent-to-spouse" amount of $6,140 for her son, and
child care expenses of $2,250.
Signed
at Sudbury, Ontario this
22nd day of March, 2005.
Sheridan,
J.
Citation: 2005TCC195
Date: 20050322
Docket: 2004-3343(IT)I
BETWEEN:
BENEDETTE CHIBULUZO,
Appellant,
and
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN,
Respondent.
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
(delivered
orally from the Bench
at
Ottawa, Canada
on
March 10, 2005)
Sheridan,
J.
[1] The Appellant, Ms. Benedette Chibuluzo, is appealing under the
Informal Procedure the reassessment of the Minister of National Revenue of her
2000 taxation year. In confirming his decision to disallow her claim for child care
expenses and an equivalent-to-spouse deduction in respect of her son, the
Minister assumed that Ms. Chibuluzo was a married person who was not living
separate and apart from her husband. At the hearing of the matter, Ms.
Chibuluzo testified that she has been living under the same roof but separate
and apart from her husband Mr. Francis Chibuluzo since July 5, 1995. In support
of her testimony, she put in evidence a copy of a separation agreement between her and Mr.
Chibuluzo dated July 5, 1995. Counsel for the Crown had not seen this document
prior to the hearing. Upon examination of Exhibit A-1, counsel advised the
Court that in view of Ms. Chibuluzo's evidence, the Crown conceded that the
assumptions upon which the Minister had based his decision were incorrect. He further
advised that in these circumstances, it was the Crown's position that the
appeal ought to be allowed.
[2] I find as a fact that
Ms. Chibuluzo has been living separate and apart from Mr. Chibuluzo since
July 5, 1995 and was continuing to do so as of the date of the hearing of this
appeal. In view of her evidence and the concession of the Crown, the appeal is
allowed and the reassessment is referred back to the Minister of National
Revenue for reconsideration and reassessment on the basis that Ms. Chibuluzo
was a married person living separate and apart from her spouse and is entitled
to claim an "equivalent-to-spouse" amount of $6,140 for her son, and
child care expenses of $2,250.
Signed
at Sudbury, Ontario this 22nd day of March, 2005.
"G. Sheridan"
CITATION: 2005TCC195
COURT FILE NO.: 2004-3343(IT)I
STYLE OF CAUSE: Benedette Chibuluzo v. The Queen
PLACE OF HEARING: Ottawa, Canada
DATE OF HEARING: March 10, 2005
REASONS FOR JUDGEMENT BY: The Honourable Justice G. Sheridan
DATE OF REASONS
FOR JUDGMENT: March 22, 2005
APPEARANCES:
|
For
the Appellant:
|
The
Appellant herself
|
|
|
|
|
Counsel
for the Respondent:
|
Nicolas
Simard
|
COUNSEL OF RECORD:
For the Appellant:
Name:
Firm:
For the Respondent: John
H. Sims, Q.C.
Deputy
Attorney General of Canada
Ottawa,
Ontario