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 granted the Crown’s motion to quash, holding it lacked jurisdiction to order a downward transfer pricing adjustment in computing FAPI.
The Tax Court dismissed the Crown’s motion to add repricing pleadings, struck parts of the 2014/15 Reply with leave to amend, and refused a stay.
The Tax Court granted the Crown leave to amend its Reply to add an alternative transfer-pricing theory, but awarded the appellant costs for the timing of the motion.
The appeal was quashed without leave to amend because the relief sought challenges the Minister’s discretionary decision under s.247(10), which is not an assessment and falls outside the Tax Court’s statutory jurisdiction; the Supreme Court’s decision in Dow controls and precludes the Tax Court from quashing or compelling reconsideration of such discretionary decisions, so the appropriate forum for challenging the Minister’s exercise of discretion is judicial review in the Federal Court.
Source excerpt
The court refused to strike the Minister's Replies as an abuse of process because the respondent's answers to demands for particulars (albeit poorly communicated) provided the arm's length prices relied upon and the defects were not incurable; issue estoppel did not apply to different taxation years or amended contracts; Rule 170.1 relief was inappropriate because factual and legal controversies remained; the respondent was ordered to provide specified particulars by June 30, 2025 and a timetable for disclosure, discoveries and reporting was set, with costs in the cause.
Source excerpt
The appeal was dismissed because s.161(7)(b)(iv) contains a causal element and, read in its textual, contextual and purposive context, the Minister's reassessment that implemented the 2008 loss carryback in 2015 was a consequence of the Bank's written request; accordingly the loss carryback is ignored for interest calculation until the date of that request and the Tax Court decision was correct.
Source excerpt
The Supreme Court held that a Minister’s refusal to grant a downward transfer pricing adjustment under s. 247(10) of the ITA is not part of an assessment.
The Minister’s decision under s.247(10) is an essential antecedent component of an assessment and thus goes to the correctness of that assessment; when an assessment reflecting the Minister’s decision is properly appealed, the Tax Court has exclusive jurisdiction to review whether the Minister exercised the s.247(10) opinion judicially and whether the assessment is correct in fact and law, with available remedies including vacatur, variation or referral for reconsideration and reassessment; accordingly such matters are not subject to Federal Court judicial review while appeal lies to the Tax…
Source excerpt
The Federal Court held that the CRA’s foreign-information requirement was procedurally fair but unreasonable, and varied it to restore earlier limits.
Grant leave to file the Amended Amended Reply because the proposed amendments raised triable issues, were timely after discovery, would not cause prejudice that cannot be compensated by costs, and promote adjudication of the true issues; deny costs thrown away because appellants did not demonstrate reprehensible, scandalous or outrageous conduct or uncompensable prejudice and the Crown’s abandonment of the transfer pricing issue was a permissible post-discovery narrowing of issues.
Source excerpt
Explore more
