Teskey
T.C.J.
:
The
Appellant
appeals
his
1994
assessment
of
income
tax.
Issue
The
issue
is
whether
the
Appellant
is
allowed
an
exemption
from
taxation
accorded
as
provided
for
in
Paragraph
81
(1
)(a)
of
the
Income
Tax
Act
which
reads:
81(1)
There
shall
not
be
included
in
computing
the
income
of
a
taxpayer
for
a
taxation
year,
(a)
an
amount
that
is
declared
to
be
exempt
from
income
tax
by
any
other
enactment
of
Parliament,
other
than
an
amount
received
or
receivable
by
an
individual
that
is
exempt
by
virtue
of
a
provision
contained
in
a
tax
convention
or
agreement
with
another
country
that
has
the
force
of
law
in
Canada.
And
Section
87
of
the
Indian
Act
reads,
87.
Notwithstanding
any
other
Act
of
the
Parliament
of
Canada
or
any
Act
of
the
legislature
of
a
province,
but
subject
to
Section
83,
the
following
property
is
exempt
from
taxation,
namely:
(a)
the
interest
of
an
Indian
or
a
band
in
reserve
or
surrendered
lands;
and,
b)
the
personal
property
of
an
Indian
or
band
situated
on
a
reserve;
The
rest
of
the
section
is
unimportant
and
Section
83
has
no
relevance.
Facts
There
are
literally
no
facts
before
me
other
than
that
the
Appellant
is
a
chartered
accountant
living
in
Victoria.
The
Minister
of
National
Revenue
(the
“Minister”)
in
making
his
assessment
assumed
that
the
Appellant’s
income
for
1994
was
not
property
of
an
Indian
situated
on
a
reserve.
Since
there
is
no
evidence
to
the
contrary,
this
assumption
stands
as
fact.
Thus
the
Appellant
cannot,
as
the
statute
stands,
come
within
the
exemption.
The
Appellant
argues
that
he
is
being
discriminated
against
by
these
provisions
and
therefore
I
should
extend
to
everyone
in
Canada,
including
him,
the
exemption.
I
must
say
that
I
find
his
arguments
totally
devoid
of
merit.
I
have
had
the
benefit
of
reading
the
decision
of
my
colleague,
Rip,
J.,
in
McLennan
v.
Minister
of
National
Revenue
(June
17,
1995),
Doc.
Vancouver
94-2905(IT)I
(T.C.C.).
I
agree
with
my
colleague’s
reasons
and
his
judgment
therein.
In
addition
thereto,
even
if
I
found
that
this
tax
exemption
for
Status
Indians
was
discriminatory
under
the
provisions
of
Subsection
15(1)
of
the
Canadian
Charter
of
Rights
and
Freedoms,
and
that
the
exemption
apply
to
all
taxpayers,
the
Appellant
still
cannot
win
as
there
is
no
evidence
that
the
income
was
earned
on
a
reserve.
Thus
in
addition
thereto,
for
the
Appellant
to
succeed
I
would
have
to
eliminate
the
requirement
that
the
income
was
earned
on
a
reserve.
Then
all
income
by
all
residents
of
Canada
would
be
exempt
from
taxation.
“What
nonsense!!!”
Thus
the
essence
of
what
the
Appellant
seeks
is
an
order
that
this
Court
strikes
down
the
whole
of
the
Income
Tax
Act.
Although
the
Appellant
does
not
request
the
remedy
of
removing
these
provisions,
if
I
should
find
them
discriminatory,
the
result
would
be
if
he
were
correct
that
the
exemption
from
income
tax
would
be
ruled
invalid
and
his
assessment
would
still
be
correct
in
law,
as
the
Minister
refused
to
grant
him
the
tax
exemption.
So
even
if
the
Appellant
was
correct
that
this
exemption
is
discriminatory,
then
the
only
thing
I
could
do
and
would
do
would
be
to
strike
out
the
exemption.
Thus
the
assessment
is
valid.
The
Appellant’s
argument
is
so
devoid
of
merit
that
giving
further
reasons
would
only
lend
legitimacy
to
his
position.
Suffice
to
say
that
the
Respondent
submitted
able,
detailed
argument,
which
I
adopt
completely
and
accept
as
part
of
these
reasons.
For
the
sake
of
brevity,
I
will
not
read
the
Respondent’s
argument
word
for
word,
of
which
I
accept
in
full.
The
appeal
is
dismissed
with
costs
to
the
Respondent
in
the
agreed
upon
amount
of
$2,000.
Appeal
dismissed.
Email this Content