Search - considered

. … It is unclear from the Decision what, if any, factors have been considered [by the decision maker] … in this case. ...

In rejecting the claim that there was no chance of success, Régimbald J stated (at paras. 28, 30, TaxInterpretations translation): [I]t is not clear, in light of sections 125.7(5), 152(3.4) and 164(1)(b), considered together and which are the subject of the application for judicial review, that the ITA does not allow the Minister to accept an amended prescribed form as requested by the plaintiff. … [T]he defendant has therefore not discharged its burden of demonstrating that it is clear and obvious that the interpretation proposed by Lemay has no reasonable chance of acceptance …. ...

Canada (Attorney General), 2016 FC 75, rev'd 2016 FCA 242-- summary under Subparagraph (b)(iii) Summary Under Tax Topics- Income Tax Regulations- Regulation 1106- Subsection 1106(1)- Excluded Production- Paragraph (b)- Subparagraph (b)(iii) CAVCO failure to adequately address argument that game-show format was a mere pretext for education The Department of Canadian Heritage through the Canadian Audio-Visual Certification Office (“CAVCO”) gave the taxpayer (a leading Quebec television producer) advance notice (later confirmed by the Minister of Heritage) of denial of the taxpayer’s application for certification of a TV series on the expressed basis that it considered the production to be a game show, stating that “each episode follows a game show format with a historical emphasis” and “the host…introduces the contestants, who compete against each other by answering a series of questions on the topic(s) chosen for the episode.” ...

Pay Audio has failed to establish that any relevant facts or circumstances were overlooked, disregarded or not properly considered by the Minister's Delegate. ...

Although quite unclear from the reasons for judgment, he apparently had previously filed nil late returns for those years in which the income was treated as covered by a foreign tax credit claim for the U.S. taxes that he now considered to be refundable. ...

The father considered himself to reside only in China, whereas his wife and daughter acknowledged that they were Canadian residents. ...

. … The Delegate reasonably considered the length of the delays and recognized that certain time periods were not appropriate for interest relief and others had already been accounted for in the earlier reviews. … … [T]here were no circumstances beyond the Applicants’ control which prevented them with complying with their obligations to pay tax. ...

Before remitting the matter to another delegate for redetermination, LeBlanc J stated (at para. 40, TaxInterpretations translation): It is not for me to determine if the Agreement should apply to the [estate], but it appears to me that it has the right to see the Agreement considered and to know why it was not applied in this case, if that was the CRA viewpoint. ...

. … [T]he Assistant Commissioner … [also] simply stated the principle that errors or omissions by tax professionals “are not considered extenuating circumstances for the purpose of remission” and then treated it as a complete answer to the applicant’s submission. … Given the importance to the applicant’s request of the question of whether any errors or omissions by the tax professionals who assisted the applicant could constitute an extenuating circumstance or, more broadly, made it unreasonable or unjust to recover the 2005/2006 debt, it was essential that the Assistant Commissioner explain why he concluded that they did not. … [I]t is insufficient to simply state the rule without also explaining why an exception should not be made in this case. ...

. … [S]ection 318 of the FCR should not be considered in isolation. Faced with a problem such as the one faced by Rémillard, the Court is capable of finding a solution that balances, to the extent possible, the objectives of meaningful review of administrative decisions, procedural fairness, and the protection of any legitimate interest in confidentiality while at the same time maintaining the open court principle …. ...