GUY VAILLANCOURT HOLDINGS INC.
Decisions
v.
THE MINISTER OF NATIONAL REVENUE
Appeal No. AP-93-097
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Ottawa, Tuesday, June 21, 1994
Appeal No. AP-93-097
IN THE MATTER OF an appeal heard on January 14, 1994, 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 March 31, 1993, with respect to a notice of objection served under section 81.17 of the Excise Tax Act.
BETWEEN
GUY VAILLANCOURT HOLDINGS INC. Appellant
AND
THE MINISTER OF NATIONAL REVENUE Respondent
The appeal is dismissed.
Sidney A. Fraleigh ______ Sidney A. Fraleigh Presiding Member
Anthony T. Eyton ______ Anthony T. Eyton Member
Desmond Hallissey ______ Desmond Hallissey Member
Michel P. Granger ______ Michel P. Granger Secretary
The appellant operates a television sales and service business in Noëlville, Ontario. On February 28, 1992, the appellant filed an application for a federal sales tax inventory rebate in respect of tax-paid goods held in inventory as of January 1, 1991. The issue in this appeal is whether the appellant's application for the rebate is statute-barred under subsection 120(8) of the Excise Tax Act.
HELD: The appeal is dismissed. In light of the fact that the appellant agreed that the application was filed on February 28, 1992, the Tribunal finds that the appellant's application was not filed before 1992, as required by subsection 120(8) of the Excise Tax Act, and is, therefore, statute-barred.
Place of Hearing: Ottawa, Ontario Date of Hearing: January 14, 1994 Date of Decision: June 21, 1994Tribunal Members: Sidney A. Fraleigh, Presiding Member Anthony T. Eyton, Member Desmond Hallissey, Member
Counsel for the Tribunal: John L. Syme
Clerk of the Tribunal: Janet Rumball
Parties: Guy Vaillancourt, for the appellant Anne M. Turley, for the respondent
This is an appeal under section 81.19 of the Excise Tax Act [1] (the Act) of a determination of the Minister of National Revenue (the Minister) rejecting the appellant's application for a federal sales tax (FST) inventory rebate made under section 120 of the Act. [2] The appeal proceeded by way of written submissions under rule 25 of the Canadian International Trade Tribunal Rules. [3] The parties submitted an agreed statement of facts, from which the facts herein are taken.
The appellant operates a television sales and service business in Noëlville, Ontario. The appellant has been a registrant for the purposes of the Goods and Services Tax since January 1, 1991. On February 28, 1992, the appellant filed an application for an FST inventory rebate in respect of tax-paid goods held in inventory as of January 1, 1991. By notice of determination dated June 22, 1992, the appellant was advised that the application was rejected, as it had been filed beyond the time period specified in the Act. By notice of objection dated August 25, 1992, the appellant objected to this determination. By notice of decision dated March 31, 1993, the respondent disallowed the objection and confirmed the determination.
The issue in this appeal is whether the appellant's application for an FST inventory rebate is statute-barred under subsection 120(8) of the Act.
Paragraph 120(3)(a) and subsection 120(8) of the Act read as follows:
120.(3) Subject to this section, where a person who, as of January 1, 1991, is registered under Subdivision d of Division V of Part IX has any tax-paid goods in inventory at the beginning of that day,
(a) where the tax-paid goods are goods other than used goods, the Minister shall, on application made by the person, pay to that person a rebate in accordance with subsections (5) and (8).
120.(8) No rebate shall be paid under this section unless the application therefor is filed with the Minister before 1992.
The appellant requested that the Tribunal consider certain extenuating circumstances which the appellant claimed contributed to the application being filed late. However, it is clear to the Tribunal that, under subsection 120(8) of the Act, an application for a rebate must be filed before 1992. The agreed statement of facts indicates that the appellant's rebate application was filed on February 28, 1992. The Tribunal finds that the application was not filed before 1992.
Although the Tribunal sympathizes with the appellant, it has no basis on which to conclude that the appellant properly filed an FST inventory rebate application with the respondent. Furthermore, as previous decisions [4] of the Tribunal make clear, the Tribunal has no jurisdiction to apply principles of equity and, therefore, has no power to relieve the appellant from the requirements of subsection 120(8) of the Act.
Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.
[ Table of Contents]
1. R.S.C. 1985, c. E-15.
2. S.C. 1990, c. 45, s. 12.
3. SOR/91-499, August 14, 1991, Canada Gazette Part II, Vol. 125, No. 18 at 2912.
4. See, for example, Pelletrex Ltée v. The Minister of National Revenue , Canadian International Trade Tribunal, Appeal No. AP-89-274, October 15, 1991, and decisions referred to therein.
Initial publication: May 22, 1997