The taxpayer disputed, inter alia, the amount of revenue from various business activities. Woods J ruled against the taxpayer on the disputed revenues, largely because the his testimony was frequently vague, evasive, or implausible. She then stated (at para. 133):
As for the gross negligence penalties, the problem that I have with the imposition of the penalties is that the evidence as a whole does not provide a very complete picture and the Crown has the burden. The income tax appeal turned to a great extent on the appellant not providing sufficient reliable evidence. With respect to GST penalties, the Crown has not presented sufficient evidence to warrant the penalties.