Uppal Estate v. The King, 2025 TCC 34 -- summary under Subsection 171(1)

The Minister assessed the taxpayer for gross negligence penalties and assessed no other penalties. The Minister's Amended Reply argued, in the alternative, that the taxpayer should be liable for penalties under ss. 162(7) and (10) for failing to file T1134 (or T1135) information returns. Before ordering that such alternative argument should be struck, Graham found (at para. 26) that the Court did not have “the power to order the Minister to assess a previously unassessed penalty” as “[p]enalties are imposed by the Minister, not by the Court” and further noted (at para. 28) that the penalties referred to in the alternative argument had nothing to do with the s. 163(2) gross negligence penalty so that the former were not a lesser version of the latter.