Serge Fournier

The appellant claimed input tax credits (ITCs) for GST paid to placement agencies that supplied casual workers.

The Minister reassessed the appellant outside the normal reassessment period, denying the ITCs and imposing gross negligence penalties, alleging the invoices were false or of convenience and part of a scheme to not remit GST.

The Tax Court allowed the appeal and vacated the reassessment, finding the Minister failed to prove the appellant made a misrepresentation attributable to neglect, carelessness, or wilful default, or committed fraud.

The evidence did not establish the appellant was aware of or complicit in the suppliers' failure to remit GST.

The appellant trust made interest-free advances to two corporations in which it held no shares.

When the corporations went bankrupt, the appellant claimed a business investment loss.

The Minister denied the deduction.

The Tax Court of Canada dismissed the appeal, finding that the appellant could not have a legitimate expectation of earning dividend or interest income, and failed to prove it made the advances to earn rental income.

Thus, the debt was not acquired for the purpose of gaining or producing income under subparagraph 40(2)(g)(ii) of the Income Tax Act.

In an appeal by agricultural producers challenging compensation calculations under a provincial farm income stabilization program, the Court held the program is an innominate contract governed by general private law principles rather than insurance contract rules.

The governing standards for performance of contractual powers were good faith and contractual fairness, interpreted in light of the program’s public-interest objective.

The Court found no reversible error in the trial findings upholding the methodology used in the economic and statistical study for 2006 to 2008 compensation.

Arguments based on reasonable expectations and alleged methodological flaws did not justify appellate intervention.