Federal Court of Appeal Decisions

Decision Information

Decision Content

Date:  20050504

 

Docket:   A-201-04

 

Citation:   2005 FCA 162

 

 

CORAM:       DÉCARY J.A.

LÉTOURNEAU J.A.

PELLETIER J.A.

 

 

BETWEEN:

 

                                                                  HAIM PINTO

 

                                                                                                                                            Appellant

 

                                                                           and

 

                                                    HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN

 

                                                                                                                                        Respondent

 

 

 

                                       Hearing held at Montréal, Quebec, on May 4, 2005.

 

                                  Judgment delivered at Montréal, Quebec, on May 4, 2005.

 

 

 

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT BY:                                             PELLETIER J.A.

 


Date:  20050504

 

Docket:  A-201-04

 

Citation:  2005 FCA 162

 

 

CORAM:       DÉCARY J.A.

LÉTOURNEAU J.A.

PELLETIER J.A.

 

 

BETWEEN:

 

                                                                  HAIM PINTO

 

                                                                                                                                            Appellant

 

                                                                           and

 

                                                    HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN

 

                                                                                                                                        Respondent

 

                                                                                                                                                           

 

 

 

 

 

 

                                     REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

                           (Delivered at the hearing at Montréal, Quebec, May 4, 2005)

 

 

PELLETIER J.A.

 

[1]               We all agree that there is no reason to intervene and that the appeal must be dismissed.

 


[2]               As a result of an audit, the appellant was reassessed according to the net worth method.  The Minister was forced to apply this procedure because it was impossible to establish the appellant’s income and expenses accurately from his accounts, the absence of which is all the more surprising since the appellant operates his own accounting business.

 

[3]               The argument before the Tax Court of Canada focused on the auditor’s findings concerning the appellant’s income and expenses.  In order to resolve those issues, the Court had to draw findings of fact from the evidence available and from its assessment of the credibility of the appellant and witnesses.  These findings cannot be challenged by this Court in the absence of a palpable and overriding error, which is not the case here.  See Housen v. Nikolaisen, [2002] S.C.R. 235.

 

[4]            With regard to the reassessment of the appellant beyond the normal period of time, we are agreed that, even if the prescription had not been waived, the Tax Court of Canada had ample reason to find that the appellant had misrepresented the facts through negligence, carelessness or fraud.  We need only note that, while the appellant reported business income of less than $9,000 per annum, he contributed $8,000 a year to the support of his two daughters, while paying life insurance premiums of about $3,100 a year.  The Tax Court of Canada judge did not err in finding the appellant either negligent or careless in providing information.

 


[5]               The appeal will be dismissed with costs, with the exception that, on the respondent’s confession of judgment with regard to two minor corrections, the appellant will be entitled to a reduction of the amount from $3,500 to $2,000 for item [TRANSLATION] “lotteries” for the 1997 taxation year and a depreciation in the amount of $791 for office equipment for the same year.

 

 

 

 

                           “Denis Pelletier”                                                                                                                                          J.A.

 

Certified true translation

Michael Palles


                                                   FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL

 

                                                       SOLICITORS OF RECORD

 

                                                                                                                                                             

DOCKET:                                          A-201-04

 

STYLE OF CAUSE:                          HAIM PINTO

Appellant

 

and

 

HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN

Respondent

 

 

PLACE OF HEARING:                                                          Montréal, Quebec

 

DATE OF HEARING:                                                            May 4, 2005

 

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT BY:        DÉCARY J.A.

LÉTOURNEAU J.A.

PELLETIER J.A.

 

DELIVERED AT THE HEARING BY: PELLETIER J.A.

 

APPEARANCES:

 

 

 

Haim Pinto

On his own behalf

 

FOR THE APPELLANT

 

 

Bernard Fontaine

 

FOR THE RESPONDENT

 

 

SOLICITORS OF RECORD:

 

 

 

John H. Sims, Q.C.

Deputy Attorney General of Canada

Montréal, Quebec

 

FOR THE RESPONDENT

 


 


 You are being directed to the most recent version of the statute which may not be the version considered at the time of the judgment.