DouangChanh v. The Queen, 2013 DTC 243 [at at 1335], 2013 TCC 320 -- summary under Subsection 152(4.2)

By services, 28 November, 2015

The taxpayer filed a timely notice of objection to a reassessment on the basis that it incorrectly denied the deduction of a charitable donation. The donation issue was common to several files, and the Minister indicated that the objection would be considered after the common issue was resolved.

The taxpayer requested, through a T1 Adjustment Request form (within the normal reassessment period), that the Minister allow carrying charges. The Minister allowed the request and issued a subsequent reassessment (which was beyond the normal reassessment period). The taxpayer did not think to object to the latest assessment, and consequently the taxpayer's right to appeal was apparently extinguished. The taxpayer applied to grant his application for an extension of time to file a notice of objection. The application was made more than one year and 90 days after the latest reassessment.

Woods J dismissed the taxpayer's appeal (as there is no basis for extending the statutory deadline for an extension application), but found that the taxpayer's initial notice of objection was still in effect. The latest reassessment had been issued outside the normal reassessment period, which only worked if the taxpayer's T1 Adjustment Request were construed as a request pursuant to s. 152(4.2). Woods J stated (at paras. 23-24):

The form was sent within the normal reassessment period and not long after the objection to the charitable donation was served. Shortly before this, the Minister had informed the applicant that no action would be taken on the file pending decisions on similar charitable donations.

In these circumstances, I would have thought it very unlikely that the applicant intended to request a reassessment to be made after the normal reassessment period thereby removing his appeal rights with respect to the charitable donation.

Topics and taglines
Tagline
T1 Adjustment Request presumed not to be s. 152(4.2) application if such application would needlessly extinguish right to appeal
d7 import status
Drupal 7 entity type
Node
Drupal 7 entity ID
334608
Extra import data
{
"field_legacy_header": "<a name=\"DouangChanh\"></a><strong><em>DouangChanh v. The Queen</em></strong>, 2013 DTC 243 [at 1335], 2013 TCC 320 <strong>[T1 Adjustment Request presumed not to be s. 152(4.2) application if such application would needlessly extinguish right to appeal]</strong>",
"field_override_history": false,
"field_sid": "",
"field_topic_category": "seealso"
}