2 total
Taxpayer cannot rely on an unallocated prior credit balance to automatically offset future GST instalments without specific instructions.
The appellant, a law firm, was assessed $185.05 in interest for failing to pay its GST instalments for the reporting period ending June 30, 2023.
The appellant argued that it had deliberately left a credit balance of $15,084.62 from a 2019 overpayment with Revenu Québec to cover future instalments, and thus the 2023 instalments were already paid.
The Tax Court of Canada held that it had jurisdiction to determine if the debt was paid to assess the correctness of the interest.
However, the Court dismissed the appeal, finding that a taxpayer cannot invoke set-off against the Crown under the Civil Code of Québec, and the appellant had not provided specific instructions to apply the 2019 refund to the 2023 debt.
The Court also rejected arguments that the 2019 overpayment constituted an advance payment or generated offsetting interest under s. 280(3) of the Excise Tax Act.
Motion to strike judicial review application granted for failing to plead material facts and grounds.
The Attorney General of Canada moved to strike the applicant's application for judicial review of a CRA decision denying his eligibility for the Canada Recovery Caregiving Benefit (CRCB).
The Federal Court granted the motion, holding that the applicant's notice of application failed to set out a complete and concise statement of grounds as required by Rule 301(e) of the Federal Courts Rules.
The notice consisted of bald statements without material facts, and the applicant's attempt to cure the deficiency with a responding affidavit was rejected.
