W
O
Davis:—In
this
matter,
the
appellant
company
has
appealed
from
a
notice
of
reassessment
dated
October
21,
1970,
whereby
the
Minister
of
National
Revenue
informed
the
appellant
that
the
tax
payable
by
it
in
respect
of
its
1969
taxation
year
was
nil.
When
this
matter
came
on
before
me
for
hearing
at
Calgary,
Alberta,
on
November
12,
1971
at
a
sittings
of
the
Tax
Appeal
Board
as
it
was
then
constituted,
counsel
for
the
Minister
moved
for
an
order
of
the
Board
quashing
the
purported
notice
of
appeal
on
the
ground
that,
under
the
provisions
of
the
Income
Tax
Act,
no
appeal
lay
from
an
assessment
stating
that
no
tax
was
payable.
In
its
corporate
income
tax
return
for
its
taxation
year
ended
August
31,
1969
the
appellant
reported
net
income
of
$5,716.11
before
applying
losses
carried
forward
from
its
1964
and
1968
taxation
years
to
the
extent
necessary
to
reduce
its
taxable
income
for
1969
to
nil,
and
thus
reported
its
total
tax
payable
for
that
year
as
nil.
On
October
21,
1970
the
Minister
assessed
the
appellant
to
nil
tax
for
the
said
taxation
year,
not
by
applying
previous
years’
losses
against
the
declared
net
income
but
by
deducting
capital
cost
allowance
in
the
amount
of
$4,250
and
income
in
the
amount
of
$1,456.11
deemed
to
have
been
distributed
to
its
shareholders
Mr
and
Mrs
Zaozirny.
On
November
16,
1970
the
taxpayer
made
formal
objection
to
the
Minister’s
assessment
and,
on
March
9,
1971,
the
Minister
issued
his
notification
under
the
provisions
of
section
58
of
the
Act
whereby
he
confirmed
that
“no
tax
is
payable
for
the
taxation
year
1969”.
Zomac
Holdings
Limited
then
appealed
to
the
Tax
Appeal
Board.
Mr
J
M
Zaozirny,
the
agent
for
the
appellant,
sought
strenuously
to
establish
a
right
on
the
part
of
the
appellant
to
appeal
from
an
assessment
whereby
no
tax
was
payable
by
the
appellant
in
a
case
where
the
methods
of
computation
employed
by
the
Minister
and
by
the
taxpayer
to
arrive
at
this
result
were
at
variance.
The
question
of
the
right
of
a
taxpayer
to
appeal
from
a
nil
assessment
has
engaged
the
attention
of
the
Courts
for
a
number
of
years.
One
of
the
most
recent
rulings
in
this
connection
is
that
of
Gibson,
J
of
the
Exchequer
Court
of
Canada
as
it
then
was
(now
the
Trial
Division
of
the
Federal
Court
of
Canada)
in
Newfoundland
Minerals
Ltd
v
MNR,
[1969]
CTC
639,
which
was
considered
and
followed
by
me
in
Lazis
v
MNR,
[1970]
Tax
ABC
605.
See
also
Falconbridge
Nickel
Mines
v
MNR,
[1971]
CTC
789
at
795/6.
In
the
Newfoundland
Minerals
case
(supra),
an
appeal
had
been
instituted
by
the
taxpayer
from
an
assessment
showing
the
tax
payable
by
the
taxpayer
to
be
nil.
When
this
matter
in
due
course
came
on
before
Gibson,
J,
on
appeal
from
the
Tax
Appeal
Board,
the
Minister
of
National
Revenue
moved
to
strike
out
the
Notice
of
Appeal
on
the
ground
that
the
Court
had
no
jurisdiction
to
hear
an
appeal
from
a
notification
that
no
tax
was
payable.
The
Court
allowed
the
Minister’s
motion
and
directed
that
the
Notice
of
Appeal
be
struck
out
on
the
ground
that
there
was
no
right
to
appeal
in
the
circumstances.
A
very
useful
discussion
on
this
ruling
of
Mr
Justice
Gibson
in
the
Newfoundland
Minerals
case
is
to
be
found
at
page
21
of
the
January-
February
1970
issue
of
the
“Canadian
Tax
Journal”
(Issue
No
1,
Vol
XVIII)
as
published
by
the
Canadian
Tax
Foundation.
After
hearing
counsel
for
the
Minister
and
agent
for
the
appellant
in
the
instant
matter,
I
have
concluded
that,
in
view
of
the
present
state
of
the
law,
I
have
no
alternative
but
to
follow
the
ruling
of
the
higher
Court
in
the
Newfoundland
Minerals
case
(supra).
Therefore,
in
the
circumstances,
the
appellant’s
purported
Notice
of
Appeal
herein
must
be
quashed.
Appeal
quashed.