NERCO CON MINE, LTD.
Decisions
v.
THE MINISTER OF NATIONAL REVENUE
Appeal No. AP-90-112
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Ottawa, Thursday, February 6, 1992
Appeal No. AP-90-112
IN THE MATTER OF an appeal heard on October 29, 1991, under section 81.19 of the Excise Tax Act, R.S.C., 1985, c. E-15;
AND IN THE MATTER OF a decision of the Minister of National Revenue dated August 27, 1990, with respect to a notice of objection served under section 81.15 the Excise Tax Act.
BETWEEN
NERCO CON MINE, LTD. Appellant
AND
THE MINISTER OF NATIONAL REVENUE Respondent
The appeal is allowed. The Tribunal orders that the matter be returned to the respondent in order to conduct a new audit regarding the appellant's refund claim.
W. Roy Hines ______ W. Roy Hines Member
Charles A. Gracey ______ Charles A. Gracey Member
Robert J. Martin ______ Robert J. Martin Secretary
HELD: The appeal is allowed. The matter is returned to the respondent.
Tribunal Members: Michèle Blouin, Presiding Member W. Roy Hines, Member Charles A. Gracey, Member
Counsel for the Tribunal: Robert Desjardins
Clerk of the Tribunal: Janet Rumball
Appearances: Kent N. Richardson, for the appellant Linda J. Wall, for the respondent
This is an appeal pursuant to section 81.19 of the Excise Tax Act (the Act) from a decision of the respondent dated August 27, 1990. The decision disallowed the appellant's objection and confirmed the assessment contained in the Notice of Assessment dated September 26, 1989.
The appellant operates a gold mine in Yellowknife, Northwest Territories. It applied for a fuel tax rebate, pursuant to section 69 of the Act, in respect of diesel fuel used in the operation of machinery and vehicles in connection with activities carried out on its mine site.
The issue is whether the activities in which the fuel was used fall within the definition of "mining" in subsection 69(1) of the Act so as to entitle the appellant to the rebate sought.
Having heard the evidence and read the exhibits produced, particularly Exhibit A-1, the Tribunal orders that the matter be returned to the respondent in order to conduct a new audit regarding the appellant's refund claim.
The appeal is allowed. Accordingly, the matter is returned to the respondent.
[ Table of Contents]
Initial publication: July 8, 1997