1068827 Ontario Inc. (Grace Motors) v. Canada (National Revenue)

Section 23 of the Excise Tax Act, read in conjunction with Schedule I ss.7 and 8, applies to the importation of used motor vehicles with air conditioning units; therefore excise tax is payable and the appeal is dismissed.

Source-derived case information.

Citation: 2011 FCA 304
Parties: Appellant: 1068827 Ontario Inc. O/A Grace Motors; Respondent: Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada as representing the Minister of National Revenue
Court: Federal Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Canada
Judgment Date: 8 November 2011
Procedural Posture: Tax Appeal (excise Tax) Federal Court of Appeal / Appeal From Federal Court Judgment; Decision Delivered (dismissed With Costs)
Outcome: Appeal dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics: Interpretation of Excise Tax Act S.23, Importation of Used Motor Vehicles, Taxation of Air Conditioning Units, Statutory Interpretation
Source Language: en

Tax Law Excise Tax Customs and Importation Administrative Law Interpretation of Excise Tax Act S.23 Importation of Used Motor Vehicles Taxation of Air Conditioning Units Statutory Interpretation

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1

Parties

1068827 Ontario Inc. O/A Grace Motors

Appellant

Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada as representing the Minister of National Revenue

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Tax Appeal (excise Tax) Federal Court of Appeal / Appeal From Federal Court Judgment; Decision Delivered (dismissed With Costs)

Legal Issues

1 Whether excise tax under s.23 of the Excise Tax Act, read with Schedule I ss.7-8, applies to importation of used motor vehicles with air conditioning units
2 Proper interpretation of s.23 and Schedule I ss.7-8

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

Appeal dismissed.
Costs awarded to respondent.

Full Case Text

Judgment text and source record

1 paragraphs

1068827 Ontario Inc. (Grace Motors) v. Canada (National Revenue) Court (s) Database Federal Court of Appeal Decisions Date 2011-11-08 Neutral citation 2011 FCA 304 File numbers A-66-11 Decision Content Federal Court of Appeal Cour d'appel fédérale Date: 20111108 Docket: A-66-11 Citation: 2011 FCA 304 CORAM: NOËL J.A. NADON J.A. SHARLOW J.A. BETWEEN: 1068827 ONTARIO INC. O/A GRACE MOTORS Appellant and HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN IN RIGHT OF CANADA AS REPRESENTING THE MINISTER OF NATIONAL REVENUE Respondent Heard at Ottawa, Ontario, on November 8, 2011. Judgment delivered from the Bench at Ottawa, Ontario, on November 8, 2011. REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT BY: NOËL J.A. Federal Court of Appeal Cour d'appel fédérale Date: 20111108 Docket: A-66-11 Citation: 2011 FCA 304 CORAM: NOËL J.A. NADON J.A. SHARLOW J.A. BETWEEN: 1068827 ONTARIO INC. O/A GRACE MOTORS Appellant and HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN IN RIGHT OF CANADA AS REPRESENTING THE MINISTER OF NATIONAL REVENUE Respondent REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Delivered from the Bench at Ottawa, Ontario, on November 8, 2011) NOËL J.A. [1] Despite the able submissions of counsel for the appellant, we are in substantial agreement with the reasons advanced by Madam Justice Heneghan of the Federal Court (reported at 2011 FC 33) for holding that excise tax – specifically tax levied in conformity with section 23 of the Excise Tax Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. E-15, when read in conjunction with sections 7 and 8 of schedule I – applies to the importation of used motor vehicles in which air conditioning units are installed. [2] The appeal will be dismissed with costs. “Marc Noël” J.A. FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD DOCKET: A-66-11 APPEAL FROM A JUDGMENT OF MADAM JUSTICE HENEGHAN OF THE FEDERAL COURT DATED OCTOBER 13, 2011, DOCKET NO. T-407-09. STYLE OF CAUSE: 1068827 Ontario Inc. O/A Grace Motors and Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada as representing the Minister of National Revenue PLACE OF HEARING: Ottawa, Ontario DATE OF HEARING: November 8, 2011 REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT BY: Noël, Nadon, Sharlow JJ.A. DELIVERED FROM THE BENCH BY: Noël J.A. APPEARANCES: David A. MacKenzie FOR THE APPELLANT Sharon Johnston FOR THE RESPONDENT SOLICITORS OF RECORD: Szemenyei MacKenzie Godin LLP London, Ontario FOR THE APPELLANT Myles J. Kirvan Deputy Attorney General of Canada FOR THE RESPONDENT

About this LexChat collection

Publisher and coverage

LexChat is published by Esheria. Coverage reflects the case law currently mapped from identified source collections; it may be incomplete, delayed, or later corrected. The official source controls where it differs from this research page.

AI and research method

Source-derived facts are shown separately from AI-generated material. If an AI summary is available, it is explicitly labelled and remains a non-authoritative research aid.

Corrections and reporting

Report a source mismatch, factual issue, personal-data concern, or licensing question to support@esheria.co.ke. Include this page's URL and the supporting official source so the record can be reviewed, corrected, restricted, or withdrawn.

Legal-information disclaimer

LexChat provides legal information and research tools, not legal advice. Verify currency, status, citations, and jurisdiction with authoritative sources and a qualified professional where appropriate.