Date: 20010719
Docket: 2000-3825-IT-I
BETWEEN:
JACK BLUSTEIN,
Appellant,
and
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN,
Respondent.
Reasons for Judgment
Beaubier, J.T.C.C.
[1] This Informal Procedure appeal was heard at Toronto, Ontario on July 16, 2001. The Appellant's son and agent David Blustein was the only witness. At the conclusion of his evidence, the Respondent moved that the appeal be dismissed because, while the 1995 assessment is appealed, in fact the appeal concerns interest assessed on account of taxes levied for earlier years.
[2] The original amount of interest assessed was the sum of $22,980.77 first described to the Appellant in a Statement of Account (Exhibit A-5) attached to a Notice of Assessment dated February 28, 1997, which related to the taxation years 1981, 1985, 1987, 1982, 1983, 1992, 1984, 1989, 1988, 1990 and 1991. It stated that if the total amount payable was paid in full by March 18, 1997, no additional interest would be charged. The Appellant paid the whole amount except the $22,980.77 interest.
[3] Previously, on August 21, 1996 and September 17, 1997 counsel for both the Respondent and the Appellant had signed a Consent to Reassessment (Exhibit A-2) respecting 1981, 1982, 1983, 1984, 1985 and 1987 to 1992. It also agreed to deductions for 1981 to 1992 of $172,599.00 as set out in Exhibit "A" thereto and a further $81,844.00 to be applied to the earlier years. Finally, in paragraph (viii), the Appellant waived his right to appeal or object to his 1981 to 1985 and 1987 to 1992 taxation years.
[4] This document was drawn and executed by lawyers for both parties and terminated their litigation then in progress. It did not refer to the matter of interest on account of the tax for the years settled by the Consent.
[5] In the Court's view Exhibit A-2, the Consent, must be read within its four corners respecting the years it settled. It terminated any appeal that might be raised for those years. Furthermore it did not deal with the possible interest to be levied on the taxes in dispute.
[6] The Appellant's Notice of Appeal itself appeals the 1995 year and any subsequent years pertaining to the tax arrears and penalties, in its opening paragraph.
[7] Exhibit A-12 is the Notice of Reassessment for 1995 which is the subject of the appeal. It refers to a previous account balance of $27,235.30 which is the interest of $22,980.77 compounded to the date of the 1995 assessment, namely May 10, 1999. As the Federal Court of Appeal stated in Ruffolo v. The Queen, 2000 C.T.C. 242, such a figure is not a component of the 1995 assessment.
[8] In these circumstances the Respondent's motion is granted and the appeal is dismissed.
Signed at Toronto, Ontario this 19th day of July 2000.
"D.W. Beaubier"
J.T.C.C.
COURT FILE NO.: 2000-3825(IT)I
STYLE OF CAUSE: Jack Blustein and The Queen
PLACE OF HEARING: Toronto, Ontario
DATE OF HEARING: July 16, 2001
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT BY: The Honourable Judge D.W. Beaubier
DATE OF JUDGMENT: July 19, 2001
APPEARANCES:
Counsel for the Appellant: David T. Blustein
Counsel for the Respondent: Meghan Castle
COUNSEL OF RECORD:
For the Appellant:
Name: David T. Blustein
Thornhill, Ontario
For the Respondent: Morris Rosenberg
Deputy Attorney General of Canada
Ottawa, Canada
2000-3825(IT)I
BETWEEN:
JACK BLUSTEIN,
Appellant,
and
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN,
Respondent.
Appeal heard on July 16, 2001 at Toronto, Ontario, by
the Honourable Judge D.W. Beaubier
Appearances
Counsel for the Appellant: Gary Blustein
Counsel for the Respondent: Meghan Castle
JUDGMENT
The appeal from the assessment made under the Income Tax Act for the 1995 taxation year is dismissed in accordance with the attached Reasons for Judgment.
Signed at Toronto, Ontario, this 19th day of July 2001.
|
"D.W. Beaubier" |
J.T.C.C.