Teskey,
T.C.J.:—The
appellant
appeals
his
reassessments
for
the
years
1983
and
1984.
Facts
The
appellant
had
no
legal
or
accounting
training.
In
1980,
without
the
aid
of
either
a
lawyer
or
an
accountant,
he
incorporated
an
Ontario
company
with
the
name
Campfort
Incorporated
(Camp
fort).
At
that
time
he
lived
and
worked
in
Ottawa
and
Campfort
purchased
camping
equipment
and
leased
the
same
to
third
parties.
In
1982,
he
was
transferred
to
Belleville
and
because
he
felt
there
was
not
a
sufficient
demand
for
the
rental
of
camping
equipment,
he
discontinued
this
line
of
business
and
sold
off
the
assets.
In
1982
a
farm
was
purchased
that
had
two
adjoining
parcels
with
separate
titles.
In
order
to
maintain
the
severance,
title
to
one
parcel
was
placed
in
his
name
and
title
to
the
other
parcel
was
placed
in
Campfort's
name.
The
Company
operated
both
farms.
Campfort
never
made
any
money
farming.
The
appellant
personally
advanced
to
Campfort
the
following
sums
during
the
following
years:
|
1982
|
$57
,000
|
|
1983
|
$53,000
|
|
1984
|
$65,908
|
|
1985
|
$74,358
|
Without
advice
of
any
kind,
he
mixed
up
the
bookkeeping
and
accounting
of
both
Campfort
and
himself.
During
the
years
under
appeal,
he
paid
personally
out
of
his
own
money
large
sums
on
behalf
of
Campfort.
In
both
years,
Campfort's
tax
return,
expensed
these
sums,
thus
treating
the
amounts
as
shareholder's
loans
to
Campfort.
A
portion
of
these
amounts
namely
$8,321.38
in
1983
and
an
amount
of
$9,918.85
in
1984
were
of
a
personal
nature.
The
quantum
of
these
amounts
are
not
in
dispute.
Appellant's
Position
The
appellant
claims
that
these
sums
which
were
paid
by
him
personally
and
expensed
by
the
Company
was
due
to
confusion,
lack
of
accounting
knowledge
and
were
mere
accounting
errors.
Therefore,
this
Court
should
rectify
these
accounting
and
income
tax
return
errors
in
this
instance
because
the
money
originally
was
paid
by
the
appellant
out
of
his
personal
funds
to
Campfort
which
did
not
have
sufficient
funds
to
meet
its
obligations.
Respondent's
Position
The
respondent
submits
that:
1.
where
the
money
came
from
is
immaterial,
2.
the
appellant
elected
to
own
and
operate
a
corporation,
3.
he
caused
the
corporation,
in
its
tax
returns,
to
expense
certain
sums
of
money
a
portion
of
which
were
a
personal
benefit
to
him.
The
amounts
being
$8,321.38
and
$9,918.85
in
the
years
1983
and
1984
respectively.
At
the
conclusion
of
the
trial,
the
Court
expressed
the
opinion
that
it
did
not
have
the
power
to
do
what
was
requested.
Since
the
agent
for
the
appellant
could
not
produce
any
authority
for
his
proposition,
he
was
given
until
September
30,
1989
to
submit
written
argument
on
this
point.
This
has
now
been
received
and
nothing
contained
therein
convinces
this
Court
that
it
has
the
authority
to
rectify
what
the
appellant
alleges
to
be
mistakes.
The
words
of
Walsh,
J.
in
Lakeview
Gardens
v.
M.N.R.,
[1973]
C.T.C.
566;
73
D.T.C.
5437
are
pertinent
to
this
case
where
at
page
591
(D.T.C.
5440)
he
said:
.
.
.
it
is
not
what
the
taxpayer
might
have
done
to
minimize
taxation
that
determines
the
issue
but
the
taxpayer
must
abide
by
the
position
which
he
has
taken.
The
appeal
is
therefore
dismissed.
Appeal
dismissed.
Email this Content