See Also
Gallant v. The Queen, 2012 DTC 1140 [at 3233], 2012 TCC 119 (Informal Procedure)
Woods J. found that the Crown was not estopped from applying s. 118.61(4) to reduce the taxpayer's unused tuition, textbook and education tax credits, even though relevant tax form (T1 schedule 11) had failed to include that subsection in its computations and even though it appeared that many taxpayers had, because of the error in the form, avoided having their credits reduced by operation of that subsection. Estoppel can bind the Crown on a misrepresentation of fact, but not of law (para. 15). Moreover, estoppel cannot preclude an exercise of statutory duty (para. 17). Woods J. dismissed the taxpayer's appeal but recommended he apply for discretionary relief.
| Locations of other summaries | Wordcount | |
|---|---|---|
| Tax Topics - Income Tax Act - Section 152 - Subsection 152(1) | 105 |
Administrative Policy
S1-F2-C2 - Tuition Tax Credit
CRA provides an in-depth example of the s. 118.61 formula.
Subsection 118.61(1)
Administrative Policy
31 May 2002 Internal T.I. 2002-0131647 F - REPORT CREDITS FRAIS SCOLARITE
Although the credits under ss. 118.5(1), 118.6(2) and 118.61(2) are permissive, the formula in s. 118.61(1) used to calculate the unused portion of the tuition and education tax credits at the end of a taxation year takes into account what could have been deductible under these subsections for the purposes of calculating the balance to be carried forward. Thus, if they are not used, they are lost.