Search - considered

Canada, 2005 FCA 355, our Court considered what appears to be the practice occasionally adopted by the Tax Court of Canada of amending reasons given orally at the hearing. ...

In particular, the negligible rental income, when considered in light of the high cost of the financing and the absence of a serious business plan, allowed the Tax Court judge to find that the applicant did not have a reasonable expectation of profit. [23]       When all is said and done, the analysis of the Tax Court judge is consistent with the approach recommended by the Supreme Court in Stewart, and the result he reached was justified by the evidence. [24]       I would dismiss the application for judicial review with costs.                           ...

The factors to be considered in determining whether to grant leave to intervene are well established: see Canadian Union of Public Employees (Airline Division) v. ...

Having carefully considered the record and the parties’ submissions, the Court is of the view that this appeal ought to be dismissed. [2]                In 2011, the Minister of National Revenue sent a Notice of Assessment to the appellant in the amount of $59,000.06 for outstanding GST under the Excise Tax Act. ...

Jarvis, 2002 SCC 73, [2002] 3 S.C.R. 757, the Supreme Court considered the distinction between an audit inquiry related to the administration of the Act and an investigation that could lead to charges under section 239 of the Act. ...

Canada, 2013 FCA 20, 444 N.R. 64). [9]                Third, I disagree that the Judge considered the wrong question. ...

The appellant’s position [6]   The appellant argued that the Judge should have interpreted paragraph 60(o.1) liberally and considered that, given the stay of his civil suit, it had been impossible for him to obtain the transition allowance against which he could deduct the legal expenses he had paid. ...

However, it asks the Court to exercise its residual discretion for in its view, this is a clear case where this new evidence is required to avoid a miscarriage of justice. [11]            Having considered this new evidence, we have not been persuaded that it provides much more than what was generally conveyed to the TCC by the parties. ...

Where circumstances beyond a taxpayer’s control, actions of the CRA, inability to pay, or financial hardship has prevented the taxpayer from complying with the act, the following factors will be considered when determining if the minister’s delegate will cancel or waive penalties and interest: a) whether the taxpayer has a history of compliance with tax obligations; b) whether the taxpayer has knowingly allowed a balance to exist on which arrears interest has accrued; c) whether the taxpayer has exercised a reasonable amount of care and has not been negligent or careless in conducting their affairs under the self-assessment system; d) whether the taxpayer has acted quickly to remedy any delay or omission. ...

It is my view that such a matter of process may be better left to the discretion of the judge who will be responsible for the trial. [5]   Secondly, and in any event, even if I am wrong with respect to the section 17.1 requirement that a corporation be represented by counsel in a general procedure appeal, Rule 30(2) would leave the matter in my discretion, including as to the conditions that may apply with respect to any particular representative in any particular case. [6]   There is case law of this Court that helpfully identifies some of the matters to be considered in exercising my discretion in this regard. ...