[OFFICIAL ENGLISH TRANSLATION]
2001-3949(IT)APP
BETWEEN:
LYNN TREMBLAY,
Applicant,
and
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN,
Respondent.
Application heard on common evidence with the application of Michel Savard
(2001-3947(IT)APP), on May 17, 2002, at Chicoutimi, Quebec, by
the Honourable Judge François Angers
Appearances
Agent for the Applicant: Michel Savard
Counsel for the Respondent: Anne-Marie Boutin
ORDER
Upon application for an Order extending the time within which an appeal from the assessment made under the Income Tax Act (the "Act"), notice of which is dated October 28, 1997, and which assessment was confirmed on April 29, 1998, may be instituted;
And whereas the instant appeals were filed after the expiry of the time limit of one year provided for by the Act;
The Court does not have discretion to extend the time. The applications are therefore dismissed in accordance with the attached Reasons for Order.
Signed at Ottawa, Canada, this 21st day of June 2002.
|
"François Angers" |
J.T.C.C.
Translation certified true
on this 8th day of September 2003.
Sophie Debbané, Revisor
[OFFICIAL ENGLISH TRANSLATION]
2001-3947(IT)APP
BETWEEN:
MICHEL SAVARD,
Applicant,
and
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN,
Respondent.
Application heard on common evidence with the application of Lynn Tremblay
(2001-3949(IT)APP), on May 17, 2002, at Chicoutimi, Quebec, by
the Honourable Judge François Angers
Appearances
For the Applicant: The Applicant himself
Counsel for the Respondent: Anne-Marie Boutin
ORDER
Upon application for an Order extending the time within which an appeal from the assessment made under the Income Tax Act (the "Act"), notice of which is dated October 28, 1997, and which assessment was confirmed on April 29, 1998, may be instituted;
And whereas the instant appeals were filed after the expiry of the time limit of one year provided for by the Act;
The Court does not have discretion to extend the time. The applications are therefore dismissed in accordance with the attached Reasons for Order.
Signed at Ottawa, Canada, this 21st day of June 2002.
|
"François Angers" |
J.T.C.C.
Translation certified true
on this 8th day of September 2003.
Sophie Debbané, Revisor
[OFFICIAL ENGLISH TRANSLATION]
Date: 20020621
Docket: 2001-3947(IT)APP
2001-3949(IT)APP
BETWEEN:
MICHEL SAVARD,
LYNN TREMBLAY,
Applicants,
and
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN,
Respondent.
REASONS FOR ORDER
Angers, J.T.C.C.
[1] The two applications were heard on common evidence at Chicoutimi, Quebec, and were filed under section 167 of the Income Tax Act (the "Act"). The applicants asked the Court to grant their applications for an extension of time to institute appeals from the assessments dated October 28, 1997, and confirmed on April 29, 1998. The applications are dated October 31, 2001.
[2] In a document filed in evidence by the respondent, the applicant Michel Savard admitted that, after serving their notice of objection, he and the applicant Lynn Tremblay received, by registered mail dated April 29, 1998, a notice of confirmation by the Minister of National Revenue (the "Minister") of an assessment made on October 28, 1997. They moreover filed in evidence, as Exhibit A-4, the objections they had sent to the chief of appeals concerning those assessments. In that same notice of confirmation, the applicants were informed that, if they disagreed with the confirmation, they could institute an appeal to this Court, which they in fact did on July 28, 1998.
[3] After filing their notice of appeal with the Registry officer, the applicants were informed that they had to comply with certain requirements in order that their appeals be validated. On February 23, 1999, they were informed by the Registry officer that their appeal file was not open, that the documents had been placed in the general correspondence and that no action would be taken. The applicants did not take any further action with respect to that correspondence or to their appeals. The instant applications to extend the time for appeal were filed on October 31, 2001.
[4] The applicants' main argument is that they never received official assessments from the Minister. The applicants claim that, in the subsequent taxation years, the Department of Revenue did not claim the amounts purportedly assessed and that, accordingly, they were never officially assessed. The applicants filed in evidence a series of documents, including certain letters exchanged between the Department and the applicants on this issue. Although there seems to have been some confusion concerning the documentation filed on this issue, it does not appear to have misled the applicants because, as Michel Savard admitted, he received the notice of confirmation from the Minister dated April 29, 1998, which refers to an assessment of October 28, 1997. That notice of confirmation was made in response to their objection, and they subsequently instituted an appeal to this Court, without however complying with the rules of procedure, and thereby rendered their appeals null and void. Their conduct leads me to conclude that they received official assessments, that they objected to them, that the assessments were subsequently confirmed and that the applicants instituted appeals after the prescribed time had expired. They are now asking this Court to extend the time to institute new appeals.
[5] Paragraph 167(5)(a) of the Act reads as follows:
167(5) When order to be made. No order shall be made under this section unless
(a) the application is made within one year after the expiration of the time limited by section 169 for appealing; and
. . .
Section 169 of the Act provides:
SECTION 169: Appeal.
(1) Where a taxpayer has served notice of objection to an assessment under section 165, the taxpayer may appeal to the Tax Court of Canada to have the assessment vacated or varied after either
(a) the Minister has confirmed the assessment or reassessed, or
(b) 90 days have elapsed after service of the notice of objection and the Minister has not notified the taxpayer that the Minister has vacated or confirmed the assessment or reassessed,
but no appeal under this section may be instituted after the expiration of 90 days from the day notice has been mailed to the taxpayer under section 165 that the Minister has confirmed the assessment or reassessed.
[6] In the instant case, the notice of assessment is dated October 28, 1997, and its confirmation dated April 29, 1998. The applications are dated October 31, 2001. The applications were thus filed after the period of one year provided for by the Act had expired. In a situation such as this, the Court has no discretion to extend the time (see Lamothe v. Canada, [2002] T.C.J. No. 95; and Carlson v. Canada, [2002] F.C.J. No. 573). It is therefore impossible for me to grant the applications, and they are consequently dismissed.
Signed at Ottawa, Canada, this 21st day of June 2002.
|
"François Angers" |
J.T.C.C.
Translation certified true
on this 8th day of September 2003.
Sophie Debbané, Revisor