Delmer E Taylor:—This is the decision in the matter of the application of John R Logan to the Tax Review Board for an order, pursuant to the provisions of subsection 167(1) of the Income Tax Act, SC 1970- 71-72, c 63, as amended, to extend the time within which a notice of objection to income tax assessment for the year’1975 could be served on the. Minister of National Revenue. Section 165 of the Act provides a taxpayer with a period of 90 days from the. date of mailing of the notice of assessment in which to serve on the Minister a notice of objection in the prescribed form.
At the hearing, the taxpayer represented himself. The notice of objection which the Minister of National Revenue was not prepared to accept without an order from the Board was dated March 7, 1978 and related to an assessment dated June 24, 1977.
The following information was contained in the notice of objection and in an attached letter: , ...
The taxpayer incurred certain legitimate business expenses which are properly deductible against Commission income in the 1975 taxation year.
It should be noted that Revenue Canada. disallowed all expenses on. reassessment and the taxpayer feels that a good portion of these expenses are allowable.
Due to a chain of events (described in a letter enclosed) the taxpayer was not able to file a “Notice of Objection” within the prescribed 90 day period.”
From the attached letter, also dated March 7, 1978:
1. Mr Logan was requested by letter of May 4, 1977 to bring in various receipts etc to support expenditures claimed in his 1975 income tax return. Mr Logan never did get around to forwarding his receipts to Revenue Canada as he was hit by a car while crossing Main Street West in Hamilton. The date of the accident was June 10, 1977. Mr Logan remained in hospital for some 2 /2 weeks (the reassessment notice was dated June 24, 1977). He then had to wear a full cast for two months followed by a partial cast for a further two months. On top of all this he changed employment. Because of these happenings I think it would be fairly safe to assume that Mr Logan’s mind was not fully focussed ‘on his income tax affairs during this period of time ie from June 10, 1977 to the end of October 1977. Therefore, as he did not file a notice of objection I would cite these extenuating circumstances as the. basic reason for requesting the “time extension”.
Mr Logan made the point that he had been preparing his own income tax returns and had sought the advice and assistance of Mr JET Dillane, CA, after recovering from his accident, when he realized his predicament. The matter was now being handled through that accountant’s office. This situation meets all reasonable criteria for agreeing to such an application.
The application is allowed.
Application allowed.