4 total
Judicial review dismissed; CRA reasonably concluded intergovernmental MOU did not apply to taxpayer's inconsistent provincial filings.
The applicant corporation sought judicial review of a decision by the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA), acting as agent for the Minister of Finance for Ontario, refusing to take further action under an intergovernmental Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) to resolve a double taxation issue with Revenu Québec.
The double taxation arose because the applicant filed inconsistent tax returns in Ontario and Quebec for the 2011 taxation year.
The Divisional Court dismissed the application, finding that the CRA's interpretation of the MOU—that it only applies when a tax authority proposes to change a taxpayer's allocation formula, not when the taxpayer files inconsistently—was reasonable.
The court also found no breach of procedural fairness.
A federal tax waiver form is deemed prescribed for Ontario tax purposes under the provincial deeming provision.
The appellant trust appealed from a summary judgment motion dismissal regarding a reassessment of provincial income tax under the Ontario Income Tax Act for the 2007 taxation year.
The central issue was whether waiver form T2029, a prescribed form under the federal Income Tax Act, operated to waive the limitation period for reassessing Ontario income tax.
The appellant argued that T2029 had never been prescribed for Ontario purposes and that government advice calling into question its prescription status prevented the waiver from operating.
The Court of Appeal upheld the motion judge's decision, holding that section 48(15) of the Ontario Act deems any form purporting to be prescribed by the Provincial Minister to be a prescribed form unless called into question by the Provincial Minister.
The court found that T2029 clearly purports to be a prescribed form and had not been called into question by the appropriate authority.
Summary judgment Motion dismissed
The Aubrey Dan Family Trust (ADFT) brought a summary judgment motion to allow its income tax appeal for the 2007 taxation year and vacate a reassessment issued by the Minister of Finance.
The motion focused on whether the reassessment was issued outside the statutory limitation period and, if so, whether the limitation period was properly waived.
The court found that the original notice of assessment triggered the normal reassessment period, which expired before the reassessment was issued.
However, the court also found that the T2029 waiver form signed by ADFT was valid under the Ontario Income Tax Act, deeming it a prescribed form and thus effectively waiving the limitation period.
Consequently, ADFT's motion for summary judgment was dismissed.
“From” in the tax credit provision included the final script stage.
This statutory appeal concerned whether writing services incurred during the final script stage of a television production were eligible expenditures under the Ontario Production Services Tax Credit.
Applying the modern rule of statutory interpretation, the court held that the word “from” in s. 92(5.3)(d) of the Taxation Act, 2007 was inclusive in context and captured costs incurred during the final script stage itself, rather than only costs incurred after that stage.
The court found that the final script stage, as reflected in the agreed facts, was integrally connected to production rather than merely preproduction development.
The Minister’s reassessment excluding those costs was set aside and referred back for reassessment.
No costs were awarded.
