Jerome,
A.C.J.:
—These
applications
came
on
for
hearing
at
Toronto,
Ontario,
on
April
10,
1989.
At
the
conclusion
of
argument,
I
gave
oral
reasons
for
granting
the
applications
and
indicated
that
if
either
party
requested
it,
brief
written
reasons
would
be
filed.
As
I
understand
the
situation,
the
taxpayers
are
caught
in
a
strict
and
technical
interpretation
of
the
law
as
it
relates
to
income
tax
appeals.
The
provisions
of
the
Income
Tax
Act
require
separate
appeals
by
the
taxpayers
for
each
taxation
year.
It
follows
invariably
that
appeals
on
the
same
issue
over
several
taxation
years
are
joined
at
trial.
Until
that
occurs,
apparently
the
taxpayers
are
required
to
treat
each
taxation
year
as
a
separate
action.
In
the
present
case,
the
taxpayers
did
all
of
that
and
took
the
separate
appeals
for
all
years
in
issue
to
the
Tax
Court
of
Canada
which
rendered
one
judgment.
The
taxpayers
filed
timely
notices
of
appeal
against
that
judgment.
Their
only
failure
is
to
believe,
as
I
would
have,
that
their
appeals
of
the
judgment
in
the
Tax
Court
of
Canada
would
embrace
all
years
in
issue.
The
Crown
contends
that
it
does
not,
and
that
the
taxpayers
are
required
to
file
separate
notices
of
appeal
for
each
taxation
year,
an
interpretation
which
I
consider
a
bit
absurd
but,
let
us
assume,
technically
sound.
If
that
is
so,
the
proper
notices
of
appeal
by
the
taxpayers
have
not
been
filed
in
a
timely
fashion
and
the
taxpayers
therefore
seek
an
order
to
extend
the
time
to
initiate
the
appeals.
The
Minister
was
always
aware
of
the
taxpayers'
intentions
to
appeal.
The
Minister
has
held
security
for
the
amounts
in
issue
at
all
times.
I
see
no
possibility
of
prejudice
to
the
Minister
and
the
certainty
of
the
denial
of
these
taxpayers'
access
to
the
appellate
Courts
which
I
consider
both
unnecessary
and
unfair.
Accordingly,
the
applications
were
granted
on
April
10,
1989.
Applications
granted.
Email this Content