Roger Dubois inc. v. Canada
The appeal is dismissed because the appellant failed to show that the Tax Court judge erred in law in concluding that only the Sartory bow qualified for CCA and that the other instruments’ CCA claims were properly disallowed; the Tax Court’s remand to the Minister for reconsideration and reassessment limited to the...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- 2015 FCA 235
- Parties
- Appellant: Roger Dubois Inc.; Respondent: Her Majesty the Queen
- Court
- Federal Court of Appeal
- Jurisdiction
- Canada
- Judgment Date
- 28 October 2015
- Procedural Posture
- Tax Appeal to Federal Court of Appeal / Hearing and Judgment Delivered From the Bench on October 28, 2015
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed with costs
- Legal Topics
- Capital Cost Allowance, Reassessment, Depreciable Property Musical Instruments
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Roger Dubois Inc.
Appellant
Her Majesty the Queen
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Tax Appeal to Federal Court of Appeal / Hearing and Judgment Delivered From the Bench on October 28, 2015
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the appellant was entitled to claim capital cost allowance (CCA) for musical instruments and related items
- 2 Whether the Tax Court judge erred in law in his findings regarding CCA claims
- 3 Whether the matter should be remitted to the Minister of National Revenue for reconsideration and reassessment
Ratio Decidendi
The appeal is dismissed because the appellant failed to show that the Tax Court judge erred in law in concluding that only the Sartory bow qualified for CCA and that the other instruments’ CCA claims were properly disallowed; the Tax Court’s remand to the Minister for reconsideration and reassessment limited to the Sartory bow is upheld.
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed with costs
Orders
- Appeal dismissed with costs
- Tax Court order remanding matter to the Minister of National Revenue for reconsideration and reassessment limited to the Sartory bow upheld
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
Roger Dubois inc. v. Canada Court (s) Database Federal Court of Appeal Decisions Date 2015-10-28 Neutral citation 2015 FCA 235 File numbers A-55-14 Decision Content Date: 20151028 Docket: A-55-14 Citation: 2015 FCA 235 CORAM: NADON J.A. TRUDEL J.A. SCOTT J.A. BETWEEN: ROGER DUBOIS INC. Appellant and HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN Respondent Heard at Montréal, Quebec, on October 28, 2015. Judgment delivered from the bench at Montréal, Quebec, on October 28, 2015. REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT BY: NADON J.A. Date: 20151028 Docket: A-55-14 Citation: 2015 FCA 235 CORAM: NADON J.A. TRUDEL J.A. SCOTT J.A. BETWEEN: ROGER DUBOIS INC. Appellant and HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN Respondent REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Delivered from the bench at Montréal, Quebec, on October 28, 2015.) NADON J.A. [1] This is an appeal from a decision by Justice Jorré of the Tax Court of Canada (2009-3024(IT)G) dated December 20, 2013, allowing the appellant’s appeal with regard to the reassessments made for the 2002, 2003 and 2004 taxation years and referring the matter back to the Minister of National Revenue for reconsideration and reassessment on the basis that the appellant could claim capital cost allowance for a Sartory bow, but not for the other musical instruments for which the appellant claimed such allowance. [2] Although we cannot fully endorse the judge’s reasons, we are of the opinion that the appellant was unable to demonstrate that the judge erred in law in concluding as he did. [3] The appeal will therefore be dismissed with costs. “Marc Nadon” J.A. Certified true translation Erich Klein FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD DOCKET: A-55-14 STYLE OF CAUSE: ROGER DUBOIS INC. v. HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN PLACE OF HEARING: Montréal, QuEbec DATE OF HEARING: octobER 28, 2015 REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF the COURT BY: NADON J.A. TRUDEL J.A. SCOTT J.A. DELIVERED FROM THE BENCH BY: NADON J.A. APPEARANCES: Emmanuelle Campeau Paul Ryan FOR THE APPELLANT Martin Lamoureux FOR THE RESPoNDENT SOLICITORS OF RECORD: Ravinsky, Ryan, Lemoine LLP Montréal, Quebec FOR THE APPELLANT William F. Pentney Deputy Attorney General of Canada FOR the RESPONDENT