Taylor,
T.CJ.:
—
These
are
appeals
heard
in
Belleville,
Ontario
on
June
5,
1991
against
income
tax
assessments
for
the
years
1982,
1983
and
1984,
in
which
the
taxpayer
claimed
business
and
travel
expenses
arising—in
his
opinion—out
of
several
ventures
both
in
Canada
and
abroad
in
which
he
was
engaged,
in
addition
to
his
regular
employment
as
a
teacher.
The
entire
matter
has
been
drawn
out
and
complicated
not
only
by
the
intricacies
and
interrelationships
of
some
of
these
ventures
among
themselves,
and
between
these
and
his
professional
role
as
a
teacher,
but
also
by
a
series
of
meetings
and
exchanges
of
correspondence
between
the
parties
extending
over
several
years.
In
this
process
the
respondent
has
recognized
some
of
the
legitimate,
or
perhaps
explainable
claims
of
the
appellant,
but
not
in
sufficient
quantity
to
satisfy
him.
The
last
two
written
accounts
of
the
items
at
issue
from
the
appellant,
one
in
1987
the
other
in
1991,
totalled
some
13
pages,
together
with
about
14
attached
schedules.
One
of
the
main
areas
of
dispute
remaining
was
the
determination
of
the
respondent
not
to
recognize
some
of
the
ventures
recounted
by
Mr.
Rehill
as
“business”,
thereby
qualifying
for
the
deductions
he
had
claimed.
The
respondent's
view
was
that
in
these
excluded
ventures
there
was
no
indication
of
a
“reasonable
expectation
of
profit".
In
my
opinion,
the
respondent
was
patently
correct
in
adopting
this
position,
and
it
might
well
be
said
that
a
serious
point
could
be
raised,
if
there
was
ever
any
indication
of
revenue
on
the
horizon,
let
alone
profit.
In
the
final
analysis,
as
a
result
of
the
hearing
of
the
appeals,
counsel
for
the
respondent
indicated
agreement
with
the
following
additional
adjustments
of
the
related
assessments,
in
the
appellant’s
favour:
1984—
Increase
the
telephone
expenses
from
$98.08
to
$196.15
1984—
Set
up
a
reserve
in
the
amount
$400.00
as
provided
under
subparagraph
20(1)(m)(iii)
of
the
Act.
1984—
Set
up
a
reserve
in
the
amount
of
$2,450.00
as
provided
under
paragraph
20(1)(e)
of
the
Act.
The
appeals
are
therefore
allowed
in
order
that
the
three
items
listed
above
may
be
adjusted
and
taken
into
account.
In
all
other
respects
the
appeals
are
dismissed.
The
entire
matter
is
referred
back
to
the
respondent
for
reconsideration
and
reassessment
in
accordance
with
the
above
reasons.
The
appellant
is
not
entitled
to
costs.
Appeals
allowed
in
part.
Email this Content