Delmer
E
Taylor:—This
is
an
appeal
against
an
income
tax
assessment
for
the
year
1976
in
which
the
Minister
of
National
Revenue
disallowed
a
claim
of
$1,000
for
a
disability
deduction
for
the
appellant’s
son.
In
assessing
the
appellant,
the
respondent
relied,
inter
alia,
on
paragraph
110(1)(e2)
of
the
Income
Tax
Act,
SC
1970-71-72,
c
63,
as
amended,
and
for
this
reason
submits
that
the
appellant
is
not
entitled
to
a
deduction
pursuant
to
the
provisions
of
paragraph
110(1)(e2)
because
his
son
was
neither
totally
blind
at
any
time
in
the
appellant’s
1976
taxation
year
nor
was
he
for
a
twelve
month
period
ending
in
the
1976
taxation
year
necessarily
confined
for
a
substantial
period
of
time
each
day
to
a
bed
or
wheel
chair.
Medical
certificates
were
presented
in
support
of
the
claim
that
the
child,
Michael,
required
constant
surveillance
and
attention.
He
was,
however,
not
confined
to
a
wheel
chair
or
to
a
bed.
The
comments
of
the
appellant
for
purposes
of
the
hearing
are
particularly
poignant:
My
personal
observations
as
follows:
When
this
Act
was
introduced,
surely
the
intent
was
to
aid
people
who
were
almost
totally
disabled,
or
who
had
dependants
who
were.
This
is
borne
out
by
the
fact
that
confinement
to
a
wheel
chair
for
substantial
periods
of
time
each
day
is
indicated
as
a
qualification
for
deduction
under
the
Act.
Confinement
to
a
wheel
chair
usually
indicates
malfunction
of
the
back
or
legs.
Am
I
to
assume
from
this
that
the
Federal
Government
has
indicated
that
only
certain
areas
of
the
body
qualify
as
a
disabling
factor?
I
respectfully
ask
the
Tax
Review
Board
to
consider
the
intent
of
the
Act,
“To
aid
disabled
people,
or
people
who
have
disabled
dependants
who
require
constant
care
and
attention”.
The
nature
of
the
disability,
in
my
opinion,
should
not
be
a
qualifying
factor;
the
extent
of
the
disability
should
determine
the
qualification.
Counsel
for
the
Minister
recognized
the
difficulty
and
dilemma
posed
by
the
appellant’s
responsibilities
towards
Michael,
but
pointed
out
to
the
Board
that
no
relief
could
be
permitted
within
the
framework
of
the
legislation
adopted
by
Parliament.
The
appeal
is
dismissed.
Appeal
dismissed.
Email this Content