Tremblay
T.C.J.:
The
facts
as
proved
before
this
Court
are
as
follows:
On
January
31,
1997,
the
applicant
was
assessed
in
respect
of
additional
income
for
the
1994
and
1995
taxation
years.
The
assessor
initially
asked
the
applicant
for
information
by
sending
him
a
letter
dated
October
10,
1995,
requesting
a
meeting
with
him
and
permission
to
examine
his
books
and
records.
Since
no
reply
was
received,
another
letter
to
the
same
effect
was
sent
to
the
applicant
on
April
4,
1996.
That
letter
was
not
answered,
and
a
third
letter
was
therefore
sent
to
him
on
June
26,
1996,
to
obtain
information
about
his
business,
Marché
aux
Puces
St-Zotique.
No
reply
was
received.
Finally,
a
fourth
letter
was
sent
to
him
on
November
8,
1996,
informing
him
of
the
increase
in
his
income:
|
Marché
aux
Puces
St-Zotique
|
|
|
1994
|
1995
|
|
$30,000
|
$30,000
|
The
four
letters
were
filed
as
Exhibit
I-1.
The
applicant
admitted
receiving
them.
The
assessments
(Exhibit
I-2)
were
made
on
January
31,
1997.
The
applicant
remembered
receiving
the
notices
of
assessment.
He
put
them
aside
and
forgot
about
them.
The
90-day
time
limit
set
out
in
subparagraph
165(1
)(a)(ii)
of
the
Income
Tax
Act
(hereinafter
“the
Act”)
ended
on
May
1,
1997.
During
that
entire
period,
the
applicant
did
not
show
any
intention
to
object.
It
was
not
until
May
20,
1997,
that
he
filed
a
notice
of
objection
to
the
assessments
with
the
respondent.
Because
the
notice
of
objection
was
filed
late,
the
respondent
refused
to
accept
it.
On
September
11,
1997,
the
applicant
filed
an
application
with
the
Tax
Court
of
Canada
to
extend
the
time
for
filing
a
notice
of
objection.
According
to
subparagraph
166.2(5)(Z?)(i)
of
the
Act,
one
of
the
prerequisites
for
granting
an
application
to
extend
time
is
the
following:
166.2(5)
When
application
to
be
granted.
(b)
the
taxpayer
demonstrates
that
(i)
within
the
time
otherwise
limited
by
this
Act
for
serving
such
a
notice
or
making
such
a
request,
as
the
case
may
be,
the
taxpayer
(A)
was
unable
to
act
or
to
instruct
another
to
act
in
the
taxpayer’s
name,
or
(B)
had
a
bona
fide
intention
to
object
to
the
assessment
or
make
the
request,
Nothing
in
the
evidence
showed
that
such
a
situation
or
intention
existed.
Conclusion
For
the
above
reasons,
the
application
is
dismissed.
Application
dismissed.
Email this Content