The taxpayer claimed that it was entitled to input tax credits (ITCs) pursuant to s. 180 respecting cellphone and other goods which it had acquired, for resale in Canada by it, from non-registrant, non-resident suppliers.
Regarding the general purpose and scope of s. 178.8, MacPhee J stated (at paras. 58-60):
As described in the technical notes, the purpose of s.180 is to prevent GST from being paid twice due to a non-resident in the billing chain having paid tax without being able to claim ITCs.
Section 180 provides relief where legal delivery occurs in Canada, but the non-resident pays GST/HST on import.
One important difference between subsection 178.8(2) and section 180 is that section 180, unlike subsection 178.8(2), requires evidence satisfactory to the Minister that the tax has been paid.
In rejecting the taxpayer’s claim, MacPhee J stated (at para. 64):
I do not find that the Minister concluded that evidence that is satisfactory to the Minister that the tax has been paid exists. [emphasis in original]