Hugessen,
J.A.:—Though
the
reasons
given
by
the
Tax
Court
of
Canada
judge
in
support
of
his
refusal
to
exercise
his
discretion
to
extend
the
deadline
are
not
beyond
all
criticism,
we
all
consider
that
the
result
at
which
he
arrived
is
the
only
one
possible
in
the
circumstances.
The
applicants
knew
in
early
January
1987
that
their
notices
of
objection
had
been
filed
late.
Applications
for
a
deadline
extension
were
not
filed
until
early
November
1987,
and
assuming
that
the
evidence
presented
by
the
applicants
could
possibly
justify
part
of
this
delay,
periods
of
several
months
remained
in
which
the
failure
to
act
was
unexplained.
Subparagraph
167(5)(c)(ii)
of
the
Income
Tax
Act
requires
that
the
Court
be
persuaded
that
the
application
for
an
extension
of
time
"was
brought
as
soon
as
circumstances
permitted
it
to
be
brought",
and
it
is
clear
that
the
judge
properly
took
the
view
that
the
applicants
had
not
discharged
the
burden
of
proof
upon
them
in
this
regard.
The
applications
made
under
section
28
will
be
dismissed.
Application
dismissed.
Email this Content