Ahmed Ali

The moving party sought leave to appeal the decision of Papageorgiou J. The Divisional Court granted leave to appeal and ordered that the terms directed by Matheson J. continue pending resolution of the appeal, specifically that the moving party suspend providing tax receipts for donations and the respondent not publish a notice of intention to revoke the moving party's charitable registration.

The applicant charity brought a motion for an interlocutory injunction to enjoin the Minister of National Revenue from publishing a notice of revocation of its charitable status.

The applicant argued that s. 168(1) of the Income Tax Act is unconstitutional as it infringes on provincial jurisdiction over charities.

The court dismissed the motion, finding that while there was a serious issue to be tried, the applicant failed to demonstrate irreparable harm with particularized evidence.

Furthermore, the balance of convenience favoured the Minister due to the strong public interest in enforcing the regulatory framework of the Income Tax Act.

The appellant appealed a reassessment disallowing the deduction of $26,510,522 in non-capital losses for its 2014 taxation year.

The losses arose from a payment made by a subsidiary to a related corporation to assume lease obligations for discontinued theatres prior to the appellant acquiring the subsidiary.

The Tax Court of Canada allowed the appeal, finding that the payment was a deductible current expense incurred to terminate unprofitable business operations, not a capital outlay or negative proceeds of disposition.

The Appellant, the sole director of a custom home building corporation, appealed an assessment under subsection 323(1) of the Excise Tax Act for the corporation's failure to remit GST/HST.

The corporation experienced financial difficulties and rented out two newly built properties, triggering the self-supply rules and liability for GST based on fair market value.

The Appellant argued he exercised due diligence by injecting personal funds to keep the corporation viable and that the corporation did not receive proceeds of sale to remit.

The Tax Court of Canada dismissed the appeal, finding that the Appellant failed to demonstrate he was specifically concerned with tax remittances and did not take proactive steps to prevent the failure to remit, such as instructing his lawyer to set aside GST/HST amounts in trust.

The self-represented appellant appealed a reassessment disallowing $20,156 in business expenses claimed for the 2011 taxation year.

The Minister argued the appellant's activities as a geologist, prospector, and inventor lacked sufficient commerciality to constitute a business, as he earned no business income that year.

The Tax Court of Canada found that the appellant's activities, though high-risk and speculative, were conducted with a predominant intention to profit and sufficient commerciality to constitute a business, noting his past successes and training.

The appeal was allowed in part; the court permitted most expenses but disallowed claims for automobile use without a logbook, interest on a personal line of credit, clothing, and multiple telephone lines, while limiting food expenses to 50%.