In confirming the dismissal at trial of a motion to vacate reassessments that the Minister had made more than 10 years following the filing by the taxpayer of notices of objection, the Court found that vacating reassessments is not an appropriate remedy for undue delay in dealing with an objection and notes (at p. 5078) that "the taxpayer may appeal to the Tax Court under paragraph 169(1)(b), or commence proceedings in the Federal Court to compel the Minister to consider the objection and deal with it".
Topics and taglines
Tagline
vacating not a remedy for lack of due dispatch
d7 import status
Drupal 7 entity type
Node
Drupal 7 entity ID
334938
Extra import data
{
"field_legacy_header": "<strong><em>James v. The Queen</em></strong>, 2001 DTC 5075, Docket: A-678-96 (FCA) <strong>[vacating not a remedy for lack of due dispatch]</strong>",
"field_override_history": false,
"field_sid": "",
"field_topic_category": ""
}
"field_legacy_header": "<strong><em>James v. The Queen</em></strong>, 2001 DTC 5075, Docket: A-678-96 (FCA) <strong>[vacating not a remedy for lack of due dispatch]</strong>",
"field_override_history": false,
"field_sid": "",
"field_topic_category": ""
}