Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
Canada decisions
Decisions matching the current search
The Tax Court dismissed the appellant’s motion to narrow 84 discovery questions, held the questions relevant, and ordered him to answer them with costs of $750.
Court upheld CRA's calculation that appellant had a cumulative excess amount based on undeducted RRSP contributions (1995, 1997, 1999) resulting in payable Part X.1 tax for 2004–2013, but ruled that late‑filing penalties must be cancelled because appellant reasonably believed, on a mistaken set of facts and through inadvertence, that contributions had been deducted and therefore satisfied the due diligence defence.
Source excerpt
The Quebec Superior Court judgment was unambiguous and did not apportion payments between spouse and children; the payments therefore constituted 'child support amounts' under s.56.1(4) and, as such, were non-deductible for the payer and precluded the appellant from claiming the child tax credit pursuant to s.118(5), leading to dismissal of the appeal.
Source excerpt
Penalties under s.162 were correctly assessed because specified future tax consequences (loss carry-backs) are not considered when determining tax payable at the time a return was due; however, for interest purposes the T1A carry-back requested when the 2008 return was filed (July 29, 2009) must be treated as taking effect 30 days after that filing (August 28, 2009) under s.161(7)(b)(iii) and s.152(6), so the Minister's interest calculation must be reconsidered and reassessed accordingly.
Source excerpt
Appeals for 2002 and 2003 dismissed for failure to file notices of objection; penalties for 2004, 2005 and 2007 vacated (conceded); 2006 repeat penalty under s.162(1) upheld for lack of due diligence; motor vehicle business use assessed at 50% of amounts claimed for 2004-2007; meals and entertainment limited to amounts allowed by Minister (20%); children’s salaries allowed at 75% of amounts claimed; alleged losses for equipment, income and goodwill are not deductible under s.18(1)(a); matter remitted to Minister for reassessment with specified adjustments; each party to bear its own costs.
Source excerpt
The appeal is dismissed for the 2007 periods but allowed for the 2008 periods: late-filing penalties for the 2008 reporting periods are deleted because the appellant attempted a timely annual filing and arrears interest must be adjusted so the January 9, 2009 payment of $3,066.50 is applied to the earliest 2008 quarters; net tax as filed remains accepted.
Source excerpt
The Federal Court of Appeal upheld the Tax Court judge's factual findings and credibility assessments because the appellant failed to demonstrate a palpable and overriding error; accordingly the appeal is dismissed except where the respondent consented to delete the gross negligence penalties for 1998 and 1999.
Source excerpt
The court found the interim agreement distinguished the support obligation from the obligation to incur household expenses; article 7 was not a binding restriction because the no‑withdrawal condition could be altered by either party and Quebec deposited funds to the Appellant's personal account. Therefore the Appellant had discretion over the payments and they met the statutory definition of 'support amount' and had to be included in her income and could be deducted by the payer. Penalties for late filing were cancelled because it was not established tax was payable and the Appellant was medi…
Source excerpt
Appeals dismissed: majority of disputed expenses were personal or unvouched and not deductible; 50% of travel allowance by the Minister was reasonable; clothing were personal not uniforms and not eligible for CCA; CCA cannot be converted into a current expense; the Court has no jurisdiction to cancel statutory interest or late-filing penalties.
Source excerpt
Explore more
