Subsection 242(1) - Cancellation
See Also
Moseley v. The King, 2026 TCC 59 (Informal Procedure)
At the time the appellant acquired a former restaurant (now vacant), he was registered for GST purposes, so that he was not charged GST. The sale was not exempted under s. V-I-2 et seq. or under s. V-I-9(2) and, thus, was a taxable supply.
After the sale, Revenu Québec retroactively cancelled the appellant’s registration, effective to before the time of the sale. Rabinovitch J was skeptical that Revenu Québec had the power to cancel a taxpayer's registration retroactively. However, this determination was not within his jurisdiction, so it was necessary for him to proceed on the basis that the appellant's registration had been retroactively invalidated.
He nonetheless concluded that, even though the appellant thus was not registered at the time of his acquisition (and was not charged GST by the vendor), the direct assessment of him by Revenu Québec was valid under s. 296(1)(b).
| Locations of other summaries | Wordcount | |
|---|---|---|
| Tax Topics - Excise Tax Act - Schedules - Schedule V - Part I - Section 9 - Subsection 9(2) - Paragraph 9(2)(a) | s. V-I-9(2) exemption does not apply to a property that was formerly used in commercial activity | 316 |
| Tax Topics - Excise Tax Act - Section 141.1 - Subsection 141.1(3) | s. 141.1(3) for greater certainty deemed a former restaurant to continue to be used in commercial activity | 199 |
| Tax Topics - Excise Tax Act - Section 280.1 | retroactive revocation of registration had the effect of eliminating s. 280.1 penalty | 201 |
| Tax Topics - Excise Tax Act - Section 296 - Subsection 296(1) - Paragraph 296(1)(b) | CRA direct assessment of a purchaser whose registration was retroactively revoked was valid under s. 296(1)(b) | 215 |
Administrative Policy
GST M 200-8 "Cancellation of Registration"
| Locations of other summaries | Wordcount | |
|---|---|---|
| Tax Topics - Excise Tax Act - Section 271 | 22 |