41 result(s)
-
1.
Paletta v. The Queen - 2017 TCC 233 - 2017-11-23
Tax Court of Canada JudgmentsIncome Tax Act
Paletta v. The Queen, Paletta c. La Reine, 2017 TCC 233, 2017 CCI 233, 2015-2662(IT)G [...] PASQUALE PALETTA, Appellant, and HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN, Respondent. [...] - The Appellant’s son, Angelo Paletta - Tim Hodgins and John Hodgins
-
2.
Paletta Estate v. The Queen - 2021 TCC 11 - 2021-03-25
Tax Court of Canada JudgmentsIncome Tax Act
Paletta Estate v. The Queen, Succession Paletta v. La Reine, 2021 TCC 11, 2021 CCI 11, 2015-2662(IT)G [...] (1) Mr. Pat Paletta’s Background 11 (2) Mr. Pat Paletta’s Trading Experience 11 [...] (7) Mr. Angelo Paletta as Mr. Pat Paletta’s Agent 15 (8) Mr. Hodgins as Mr. Pat Paletta’s Agent 15
-
3.
Paletta Estate v. The Queen - 2021 TCC 41 - 2021-06-17
Tax Court of Canada JudgmentsIncome Tax Act
Paletta Estate v. The Queen, Paletta (Succession) c. La Reine, 2021 TCC 41, 2021 CCI 41, 2015-2662(IT)G [...] THE ESTATE OF PASQUALE PALETTA, Appellant, and HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN, [...] In the eighth taxation year, Mr. Paletta chose to realize a modest gain.
-
4.
Paletta v. The Queen - 2019 TCC 205 - 2022-04-05
Tax Court of Canada JudgmentsIncome Tax Act
Paletta v. The Queen, Paletta c. La Reine, 2019 TCC 205, 2019 CCI 205, 2013-225(IT)G, 2013-2420(IT)G, 2013-4837(IT)G [...] [15] Pat Paletta’s son, Angelo Paletta (“Mr. Paletta”), began working in Paletta International’s real estate and other businesses in the late 1980s. He eventually took over the day-to-day operations of the company in the early 2000s. [...] I. Paletta International Loan [225] I have similar concerns about the Paletta International Loan.
-
5.
Paletta v. The Queen - 2016 TCC 171 - 2016-07-13
Tax Court of Canada JudgmentsIncome Tax Act
Paletta v. The Queen, Paletta c. La Reine, 2016 TCC 171, 2016 CCI 171, 2015-2662(IT)G [...] Pasquale Paletta, Appellant, and HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN, Respondent. [...] Pasquale Paletta, Appellant, and HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN, Respondent.
-
6.
Cougar Helicopters Inc. v. The Queen - 2017 TCC 126 - 2017-06-30
Tax Court of Canada JudgmentsIncome Tax Act
[35] Several similarities exist, in my view, in the present motion and the motion brought in Paletta (albeit a different question). [...] Recently affirmed by the Federal Court of Appeal in Paletta, supra at paragraph 4. [...] [20] Paletta, supra at paras 29 and 30 referring to Nesbitt v Canada, 96 DTC 6588 (FCA).
-
7.
Tweneboah v. The King - 2023 TCC 121 - 2023-08-16
Tax Court of Canada JudgmentsIncome Tax Act
[6] More recently, in Canada v Paletta, 2022 FCA 86 [Paletta],[2] the Federal Court of Appeal held that an activity without any personal element must be conducted with a view to profit in order to constitute a source of income: [...] [24] In Canada v. Paletta Estate, 2022 FCA 86 there was no suggestion that there was any hobby or personal element to the activity in question. [...] [23] In Paletta, the Federal Court of Appeal made it clear that “neglect” refers to a lack of reasonable care.
-
8.
Coopers Park Real Estate Development Corporation v. The Queen - 2022 TCC 82 - 2022-07-15
Tax Court of Canada JudgmentsIncome Tax Act
[22] In Paletta v R, 2017 TCC 233 (“Paletta”), the transactions in issue shared not only a general similarity with transactions carried on by other taxpayers but also a commonality of participants in the transactions: [...] [6] Paletta, paragraph 36. [7] Paletta, paragraphs 22 and 23. [8] Paletta, paragraph 26. [...] [10] Paletta, paragraph 15b. [11] Paletta, paragraphs 31 and 32. [12] Paletta, paragraphs 47, 48 and 49.
-
9.
Thompson Bros. (Constr.) Ltd. v. The Queen - 2021 TCC 15 - 2021-02-26
Tax Court of Canada JudgmentsIncome Tax Act
I reiterate here paragraphs 11, 12 and 13 of Paletta, summarizing applicable legal principles: [...] As well expressed in Paletta, supra, para. 22, the CRA auditor is not “the gatekeeper” as to what documents should be produced. [...] Relevance, not reliance, is the deciding factor with respect to disclosure, and there are no material differences between the present appeals and the Paletta case.
-
10.
McCartie v. The Queen - 2018 TCC 185 - 2018-09-19
Tax Court of Canada JudgmentsIncome Tax Act
A concise and helpful summary of why and how this occurred is provided by Justice Owen in Paletta v HMQ [3] . [...] [4] Paletta, supra, at paragraph 12. [5] Ibid, at paragraph 25. [6] Ibid. [...] [7] Paletta v HMQ, 2017 FCA 33. [8] 2078970 Ontario Inc. v HMQ, 2017 TCC 173 at paragraph 7.
-
11.
Lehigh Hanson Materials Limited v. The Queen - 2017 TCC 205 - 2017-10-06
Tax Court of Canada JudgmentsIncome Tax Act
[24] In Paletta, Justice Owen indicates that “Rule 58 does not provide a means to address such questions that are not raised in the pleadings.” [...] [2] Justice Owen in Paletta v Canada, 2016 TCC 171, 2016 DTC 1145 [Paletta] at paras 10-11, notes current Rule 58, effective February 7, 2014, is a consolidation under a singular rule of former Rules 58 to 62. [...] Paletta, supra note 2 at para 34. [48] HSBC, supra note 41 at para 13.
-
12.
Preston v. The King - 2023 TCC 136 - 2023-09-07
Tax Court of Canada JudgmentsIncome Tax Act
[9] Income Tax Act, section 3; Canada v. Paletta, 2022 FCA 86 at paragraph 30 [...] [10] Income Tax Act, subsection 9(1); Canada v. Paletta, 2022 FCA 86 at paragraph 31 [...] [11] Income Tax Act, subsection 9(2); Canada v. Paletta, 2022 FCA 86 at paragraph 31
-
13.
Zupet v. The King - 2023 TCC 111 - 2023-08-01
Tax Court of Canada JudgmentsIncome Tax Act
[40] Income Tax Act, section 3; Canada v. Paletta, 2022 FCA 86 at paragraph 30 [...] [41] Income Tax Act, subsection 9(1); Canada v. Paletta, 2022 FCA 86 at paragraph 31 [...] [42] Income Tax Act, subsection 9(2); Canada v. Paletta, 2022 FCA 86 at paragraph 31
-
14.
2078970 Ontario Inc. v. The Queen - 2017 TCC 173 - 2017-09-07
Tax Court of Canada JudgmentsIncome Tax Act
[6] At paragraphs 10 to 25 of Paletta v. R., 2016 TCC 171, Justice Owen provided the following overview of Rule 58 as it now reads following changes thereto which came into effect in 2014:[4] [...] [4] Paletta was upheld by the Federal Court of Appeal following the hearing of these motions. [...] See Paletta v. R., 2017 FCA 33. [5] Footnotes 6 to 9 referenced in the excerpted quotation from Paletta read as follows:
-
15.
Matthew MacIsaac Consulting Inc. v. The Queen - 2020 TCC 44 - 2020-07-06
Tax Court of Canada JudgmentsIncome Tax Act
[26] In Pasquale Paletta v. Her Majesty the Queen, 2016 TCC 171, affirmed by the Federal Court of Appeal in 2017 FCA 33, this Court was asked to consider a proposed rule 58 question which also dealt with subparagraph 152(4)(a)(i). [...] [28] In that appeal, examinations for discovery had not yet been held: see Paletta, 2016 TCC 171 at paragraph 2. [...] [29] Similar to the conclusion reached in Paletta at paragraph 43, I am of the view that the proposed approach would not provide a fair and just adjudication of the statute-barred issue.
-
16.
Stackhouse v. The King - 2023 TCC 156 - 2023-11-08
Tax Court of Canada JudgmentsIncome Tax Act
[100] With respect, this rephrasing does not reflect the test stated in Stewart, nor is it justified by the approach taken by Noël, C.J. in R. v. Paletta, 2022 FCA 86 (“Paletta”). [...] Rather, Noël, C.J. recognized that the peculiar facts of the Paletta case called into question the validity of the assumption underlying the test in Stewart. [...] [32] Paletta at paragraph 33. [33] See, for example, Stewart at paragraph 51.
-
17.
632738 Alberta Ltd. v. The Queen - 2019 TCC 225 - 2019-10-17
Tax Court of Canada JudgmentsIncome Tax Act
[29] In Paletta v. The Queen, 2016 TCC 171, 2016 DTC 1145 [Paletta], Justice Owen highlighted that observation, reviewed the cases, considered the current iteration of Rule 58 anew in the context of the revisions to Rule 58 and found even if one of the possible outcomes in subsection 58(2) was not met, the Rule could still [...] [23] Paletta, supra at paras 20 to 25 aff’g 2017 FCA 33. See also Cougar Helicopters v. The Queen, 2017 TCC 126. [...] [48] Paletta wanted to resolve a limitations issue as to whether a misrepresentation attributable to neglect, neglect, carelessness, or wilful default on a Rule 58 application.
-
18.
Porisky v. The King - 2024 TCC 84 - 2024-07-18
Tax Court of Canada JudgmentsIncome Tax Act
[24] Income Tax Act, section 3; Canada v. Paletta, 2022 FCA 86 at paragraph 30 [...] [25] Income Tax Act, subsection 9(1); Canada v. Paletta, 2022 FCA 86 at paragraph 31 [...] [31] Canada v. Paletta, 2022 FCA 86 at paragraph 36; Stewart v. Canada, 2002 SCC 46 (CanLII) at paragraph 60
-
19.
Yourkin v. The Queen - 2014 TCC 48 - 2014-02-13
Tax Court of Canada JudgmentsIncome Tax Act
In Scherer v. Paletta [1966] 2 O.R. 524-527, Justice Evans of the Ontario Court of Appeal stated: [...] As between Mr. Sourani and his lawyer, there may have been a limitation on the lawyer’s authority, but that was not binding on the Tax Court Judge or counsel for the Minister who had no knowledge of any such limitation (Scherer v. Paletta, [1966] 2 O.R. 524, at 526-527(C.A.)).
-
20.
Fiducie Historia v. The Queen - 2021 TCC 38 - 2021-05-17
Tax Court of Canada JudgmentsIncome Tax Act
As Justice Owen states in Paletta v. The Queen, 2016 TCC 171, "[t]he inclusion of this requirement confirms the broad scope of current Rule 58, as it may now be used to address virtually any issue that could arise in a full hearing of the appeal." [...] [36] In Paletta, the dispute concerned a question of a penalty for gross negligence and a statue-barred issue under the ITA. Justice Owen dismissed the application for an order under Rule 58 on the grounds that "[t]he Appellant's suggested approach to the evidence would not provide a fair and just adjudication of the
-
21.
Jovic Developments Limited v. The Queen - 2021 TCC 19 - 2021-03-16
Tax Court of Canada JudgmentsPart IX of the Excise Tax Act (GST)
[24] In the 2016 decision, in Paletta v. R. [12] , Justice Owen provides a useful analysis of Rule 58 [13] . [...] [38] With respect to the first branch of the Subrule 58(2) [21] , as Justice Owen outlined in Paletta, supra, the Court can take account of wider considerations than those set out in the section.
-
22.
Encore Cellular Inc. v. The King - 2024 TCC 35 - 2024-03-14
Tax Court of Canada JudgmentsPart IX of the Excise Tax Act (GST)
[38] The FCA found that these requirements were disjunctive under subsection 162(2) of the Income Tax Act in Wynter v R, 2017 FCA 195 at para 11 [Wynter] and in Canada v Paletta, 2022 FCA 86 at para 66 [Paletta]. [...] [42] Venne supra note 31 at para 37; Guindon v Canada, 2015 SCC 41 at para 60 [Guindon]; Wynter supra note 38 at para 19; Paletta supra note 38 at para 67; Rexe supra note 92 at para 37; Vocan Health supra note 34 at para 148.
-
23.
Baker v. The Queen - 1999-02-09
Tax Court of Canada JudgmentsIncome Tax Act
[4] Scherer v. Paletta [1966] 2 O.R. 524 (C.A.); Begg v. East Hants and Nova Scotia (1986) 75 N.S.R. (2d) 431 (C.A.).
-
24.
LBL Holdings Limited v. The Queen - 2018 TCC 63 - 2018-03-27
Tax Court of Canada JudgmentsPart IX of the Excise Tax Act (GST)
[5] Paletta v. The Queen, 2017 TCC 233. [6] My understanding is that these stores were operated by various members of the MacNaughton family. [...] [9] In Paletta, Justice D’Arcy concluded that CRA information that was provided to the auditor in the course of the audit is relevant whether the auditor found it relevant or not.
-
25.
Ahamed v. The King - 2023 TCC 177 - 2023-12-21
Tax Court of Canada JudgmentsIncome Tax Act
Paletta Estate v The Queen, 2021 TCC 41 50% Univar Holdco Canada ULC v The Queen, 2020 TCC 15