Hickerty v. The Queen, 2007 TCC 482 -- summary under Subsection 167(5)

By services, 28 November, 2015

The taxpayer mailed her appeal to a CRA address instead of the Tax Court Registry within the applicable deadline (and before she received CRA's information package that would have told her the correct recipient for an appeal). She applied to the Court under s. 167 for an extension.

Boyle J granted the application, notwithstanding that the taxpayer's reassessments were dated 8 July 2003, and the Tax Court Registry did not receive a copy of the appeal until December 2004, more than a year after the 90-day filing deadline. Based on the principle that the Tax Court prefers to decide appeals on their merits, Boyle J stated (at para. 12):

In the circumstances, I am of the view that the period during which the taxpayer is under a reasonable but mistaken belief that she has validly instituted an appeal is not included in the further one year grace period provided for in paragraph 167(5)(a). ... [I]f a taxpayer mistakenly but reasonably believes that she has validly instituted an appeal and the other requirements of subsection 167(5) are met, the one year grace period stops running until the taxpayer becomes aware, or should have become aware if she is acting and thinking reasonably, that the intended appeal was invalid.

Topics and taglines
d7 import status
Drupal 7 entity type
Node
Drupal 7 entity ID
334985
Extra import data
{
"field_legacy_header": "<strong><em><a name=\"Hickerty\"></a>Hickerty v. The Queen</em></strong>, 2007 TCC 482",
"field_override_history": false,
"field_sid": "",
"field_topic_category": "seealso"
}