Brulé,
TCJ:—This
is
a
joint
application
by
Paul
E.
Caouette
and
by
Yvonne
Caouette
made
pursuant
to
section
167
of
the
Income
Tax
Act
to
extend
the
time
within
which
notices
of
appeal
may
be
instituted
to
the
Tax
Court
of
Canada
in
respect
of
the
1977
and
1979
taxation
years
for
Paul
E.
Caouette
and
in
respect
of
the
1977
taxation
year
for
Yvonne
Caouette.
Facts
The
notices
of
reassessment
were
mailed
on
November
12,
1982,
and
the
notices
of
appeal
were
mailed
on
February
11,
1983.
This
latter
date
was
the
ninety-
first
day
after
notices
of
reassessment
and
in
fact
was
one
day
late
in
filing.
There
is
no
dispute
over
these
facts
as
the
documents
were
mailed.
Taxpayers'
positions
It
was
put
forth
by
the
agent
for
the
applicants
that
they
were
under
the
impression
that
they
had
three
months
in
which
to
file
and
that
even
the
tax
department
divided
the
year
into
monthly
periods.
It
was
suggested
that
the
applicants
on
that
basis
had
until
February
11
to
file
(three
months
after
November
12).
The
applicants
also
cited
that
this
was
a
busy
period
for
them
and
it
was
not
until
early
February
that
they
devoted
time
to
this
matter.
In
their
applications,
the
applicants
stated
that
they
prepared
the
notice
of
appeal
on
February
10,
1983,
(the
ninetieth
day)
believing
it
to
be
one
day
in
advance
of
the
deadline.
They
delivered
it
to
the
post
office
at
St
Paul,
Alberta.
In
this
small
town
the
applicants
received
a
receipt
dated
February
11,
1983,
and
the
notices
were
postmarked
from
Edmonton,
Albeta,
on
February
12,
1983.
There
is
some
doubt
as
to
dates
of
delivery
because
of
the
postal
system.
Minister's
position
Counsel
for
the
respondent
did
not
make
any
specific
argument
other
than
to
point
out
that
in
order
for
the
applicants
to
receive
extensions
the
provisions
of
section
167
must
be
met.
Analysis
There
are
two
areas
of
concern
in
this
case.
The
first
is
the
question
of
whether
notices
of
appeal
were
properly
filed
on
the
ninetieth
day
as
required
by
section
169
or
whether
they
were
not
filed
until
the
ninety-first
day.
Certainly
they
were
dated
on
the
ninetieth
day
and
on
evidence
adduced
and
not
refuted
were
marked
by
the
post
office
in
St
Paul
on
February
11,
1983,
or
on
the
ninety-first
day.
Some
discussion
arose
as
to
delivery
being
made
late
on
the
ninetieth
day
on
February
10,
1983,
but
the
post
office
not
delivering
the
letter
or
forwarding
it
until
February
11
and
marking
the
receipt
accordingly.
If
in
fact
this
took
place
the
applicants
were
within
the
time
limit.
When
the
Minister
objected
to
the
date
the
applicants
requested
an
extension
for
instituting
their
appeals
and
proceeded
by
way
of
section
167
to
rectify
any
deficiency
which
might
be
present.
In
my
opinion
the
applicants
have
met
the
requirements
of
that
section
by
the
evidence
tendered,
both
written
and
orally,
by
their
agent.
Applications
allowed
I
find
that
the
time
within
which
the
said
notices
of
appeal
may
be
instituted
is
hereby
extended
to
the
date
hereof
and
that
the
said
notices
of
appeal
received
by
the
Tax
Court
of
Canada
are
hereby
deemed
to
be
valid
notices
of
appeal.
Application
granted.
Email this Content