Anita Balakumar

The appellant, BC Hydro, appealed the Minister's disallowance of an input tax credit (ITC) of $910,517 under the Excise Tax Act.

The ITC related to an $8.5 million payment made by BC Hydro to a supplier for an optional term extension in an amended electricity purchase agreement.

BC Hydro argued the payment was made as a consequence of a modification to the agreement and thus deemed to include GST/HST under section 182 of the ETA.

The Tax Court of Canada dismissed the appeal, finding that the payment was consideration for a distinct taxable supply (the optional term extension) under section 165 of the ETA, and therefore section 182 did not apply.

The appellant brought a motion to hold his tax appeal in abeyance pending the outcome of an application for judicial review in the Federal Court regarding the denial of a Mutual Agreement Procedure (MAP) request.

The Tax Court of Canada dismissed the motion, finding that the request was premature as the MAP request had already been denied and there was no current issue of double taxation for the years under appeal.

The Court ordered the parties to file a joint request for a timetable to proceed with the appeals.

The applicant sought judicial review of a Canada Revenue Agency decision denying his request for taxpayer relief from arrears interest under section 220(3.1) of the Income Tax Act.

The arrears stemmed from a 1998 charitable donation deduction involving a hedge fund that was subsequently reassessed.

The applicant argued the denial was unreasonable given a previous settlement to reconsider the matter.

The Federal Court found the decision maker's reasoning justified and intelligible, concluding that the CRA's decision to deny relief, based on the applicant's failure to address the balance and lack of CRA delay, was reasonable.

The application for judicial review was dismissed.