Section 297

Subsection 297(1)

See Also

Poirier v. The Queen, 2019 TCC 8

12 months to bounce a rebate application was “with all due dispatch”

Notwithstanding that the appellant and his wife had already agreed to lease the condo, on their acquisition of a new condo the appellant provided a signed New Housing Rebate application form to the builder along with a statutory declaration indicating that he would be occupying the condo, and was credited with the rebate amount at closing by the builder. However, the builder did not submit the New Housing Rebate application form to the CRA until February 24, 2014 (approximately 22 months after the closing). CRA sought additional information from the appellant by letter dated January 6, 2015, and in an ensuing phone conversation, the appellant was told that the New Housing Rebate would be denied. This occurred by Notice of Assessment dated February 13, 2015. Shortly before this assessment, the appellant filed a Rental Rebate application with CRA, which was denied by Notice of Assessment, and to which the appellant objected.

Smith found that the Minister had acted “with all due dispatch,” as required by s. 297(1), in considering the application for the New Housing Rebate, stating (at paras 14, 18 and 19):

…[T]he expression “with all due dispatch” is the equivalent of “with all due diligence” or “within a reasonable time” but there is no fixed time period for the performance of the duty to assess or reassess: Ficek v. Canada (Attorney General), 2013 FC 502 (para.19) and Duchaine v. The Queen, 2015 TCC 245 (para. 26).

… [I]it is only relevant to determine whether the Minister acted “with all due dispatch” during the two months that followed receipt of the application from the Builder and I have no difficulty in concluding that the Minister has satisfied that requirement. Even if the issue had been whether the Minister had acted “with all due dispatch” in the 12 months or so that followed receipt, I would have found that this was an acceptable period of time. …

Words and Phrases
with all due dispatch
Locations of other summaries Wordcount
Tax Topics - Excise Tax Act - Section 254 - Subsection 254(2) - Paragraph 254(2)(b) intention to occupy vitiated when agreement to lease the new condo 103
Tax Topics - Excise Tax Act - Section 256.2 - Subsection 256.2(7) - Paragraph 256.2(7)(a) no power to extend 2-year deadline even where new housing rebate mistakenly applied for within 2 years 126
Tax Topics - Statutory Interpretation - Interpretation Act - Section 32 failure to state material particulars not cured by s. 32 151
Tax Topics - Excise Tax Act - Section 262 - Subsection 262(1) failure to include prescribed information vitiated purported new rental housing rebate application 270
Tax Topics - Excise Tax Act - Section 296 - Subsection 296(2.1) s. 296(2.1)(b) precluded using s. 296(2.1) to overcome the 2-year deadline for claiming the NRRP rebate 302

Subsection 297(2.1)

See Also

Zdzieblowska v. The Queen, 2019 TCC 40 (Informal Procedure)

assessment under s. 297(1) engaged s. 296(2.1) offset obligation

D’Arcy J dealt with a situation where a new home purchaser had claimed a new home rebate on the purchase, whereas in fact a new rental home rebate should instead have been claimed. He found that s. 296(2.1) is applicable where such an individual is assessed to deny a new home rebate.

In particular, after finding that an assessment of an amount owing under s. 264(1) is not made under s. 296 but, rather, under s. 297(2.1), D’Arcy J stated (at paras. 30, 32, 36):

[A]n amount is only payable under subsection 264(1) and assessed under subsection 297(2.1) if an amount has previously been paid to the person in respect of a rebate. …

When making the subsection 297(2.1) assessment for the overpayment of the rebate, the Minister must consider subsection 296(2.1) since she is assessing an amount that became payable by the person under Part IX of the Act. …

CRA in assessing must take into account any unclaimed new rental housing rebate that was available, as was the case here. However, CRA failed to do so, and the individual failed to file a notice of objection. The individual instead made a late filing for a new rental housing rebate, which was the incorrect thing to do as the two year deadline for making such a filing was inflexible (whereas there is no time limitation for requiring CRA to take that rebate into account at the time it assesses the individual to deny a new home rebate.)

Locations of other summaries Wordcount
Tax Topics - Excise Tax Act - Section 296 - Subsection 296(2.1) CRA is required to grant an unclaimed and available new rental housing rebate when assessing to deny a new home rebate 296

Subsection 297(4)

Administrative Policy

22 June 2017 Interpretation 180966

interest on missed rebate claim

When a person requests a reassessment of a PSB rebate application for a particular claim period to allow for missed or misstated amounts for that period, when does interest on the resulting rebate amount take effect? CRA responded:

Under subsection 297(4), interest is payable on the rebate beginning on the 30th day after the day the application “in which” the rebate is claimed is filed with the Minister. As legislatively we cannot accept a second application for a PSB rebate for the same claim period, subsection 297(4) will apply since there is no other codified date for interest to begin in such a situation.

Locations of other summaries Wordcount
Tax Topics - Excise Tax Act - Section 262 - Subsection 262(2) where a rebate claimant has underclaimed, it can request an assessment of the claim 491
Tax Topics - Excise Tax Act - Section 296 - Subsection 296(2) discretion to assess a previously filed rebate application to increase rebate 88
Tax Topics - Excise Tax Act - Section 296 - Subsection 296(2.1) required inclusion in assessment can include a rebate claim that was underclaimed 162
Tax Topics - Excise Tax Act - Section 261.4 - Subsection 261.4(1) - Paragraph 261.4(1)(c) second rebate application accepted for different transaction 145