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 struck moot portions of Brass Collar’s appeal and parts of an affidavit, holding there was no live tax controversy and no basis to continue.
Motion in a CEWS/CERS tax appeal partly granted: procedural fairness pleadings and a non-available remedy were struck, but most CERS-related facts and grounds remained.
The Tax Court dismissed the appeal without costs after finding it lacked jurisdiction over the residence dispute and that the appellant had appealed to the wrong court.
The appeal was quashed because the appellant failed to satisfy the statutory condition precedent of filing a timely notice of objection to the assessment (and did not apply for the required extension under s.166.2), and because the Tax Court lacks jurisdiction to entertain an appeal of the Minister's discretionary refusal to accept a T1 adjustment request; the proper remedies are administrative review and judicial review or a remission application under the Financial Administration Act.
Source excerpt
The Court of Appeal held that Claim 2 was, in substance, a challenge to tax assessments and belonged in the Tax Court, so it struck the claim.
Dismissal: The Tax Court lacks jurisdiction to order the Minister to pay the claimed refund; the Minister’s refusal to pay was pursuant to s.164(1.5) because the return was filed after the 10‑year limit, and that decision is not within the Tax Court’s assessment/reassessment appeal jurisdiction.
Source excerpt
The appellant was not an "eligible individual" under s.122.6(e) of the Income Tax Act because she was neither a protected person nor a temporary resident as those statuses require formal conferral under IRPA/IRPR; the s.15 Charter challenge was not entertained because it was raised for the first time on appeal without an adequate record and would prejudice the Crown; the Tax Court exceeded its jurisdiction by directing that the Minister "seriously consider" remission or waiving of interest and penalties after dismissing the appeal; accordingly the appeal is dismissed and the cross-appeal allo…
Source excerpt
The court held that bcIMC is immune from GST/HST as a provincial Crown agent, but it is nevertheless bound by the RTA and CITCA for those assets.
The Supreme Court held that penalties under Income Tax Act s. 163.2 are administrative, not criminal, so Charter s. 11 does not apply.
Subsection 167(5) of the Income Tax Act establishes a mandatory one-year limitation after the 90-day appeal period and the Court will only suspend that limitation under Hickerty where the taxpayer acted reasonably and diligently in the mistaken belief that an appeal had been validly instituted; here the appellants did not act reasonably or diligently, did not file with the Tax Court, and the CRA is not the Court Registry, therefore the applications were barred and must be dismissed.
Source excerpt
Explore more
