logo image

Change of Appeals Officer after 1st Part of Appeal Successfully Found in our Favour

In the case of our appeals on 1573454 Ontario Ltd (157) and 1514357 Ontario Ltd (151), for some reason we managed to have these fast-tracked at the beginning.

Both of these companies are involved in the construction and sale of condominiums in Cobourg, Ontario and in both cases, residential suites were a large part of the developments. Under government legislation to limit taxation on residential construction, there are “New Homeowner’s Rebates”, which were originally intended to lessen the impact of GST (now HST) in the province of Ontario. In Ontario, builders generally include HST in their selling price and the purchaser assigns the rebate over to the builder. In the case of both of these companies, the “New Homeowner’s Rebates” were disallowed by CRA officers in Belleville and they amounted to very substantial sums.

In the case of 1573454, CRA officials made an assessment of approximately $770,000 in connection with various rebates and disallowed tax credits (ITCs).

We appealed all parts of this assessment and the first appeals officer found fairly quickly in our favour regarding the “New Homeowner’s Rebates” on 1573454 and approved approximately $440,000 reducing the alleged outstanding amount down to $330,000. We expected that after the appeals officer had looked at the remainder of the claim, we would be given a further $257,000 in Retail Sales Tax (RST) transitional rebates under legislation enacted by the Ontario government.

The balance would be taken care of by the rebates of the ITCs and overall on this company, we expected a rebate of around $80,000 when everything was properly assessed and penalties and interest reversed.THAT IS NET OWING TO US.

IMAGINE OUR SURPRISE AFTER OUR FIRST SUCCESS IN THIS APPEAL WHEN THE OFFICER WHO FOUND IN OUR FAVOUR WAS REMOVED FROM THE FILE!

Unbievably a new officer was appointed who apparently had no experience with HST and generally dealt with corporate tax appeals. Mr. Allard was given both of the files of 157 and 151 and we have heard very little from him over the next Nine months. CHANGING APPEALS OFFICERS IN THE MIDDLE OF AN APPEAL SMELLS OF SOME FORM OF MANIPULATION AND MORE THAN LIKELY CORRUPTION AND THE CRA BELLEVILLE WERE CLEARLY UNHAPPY WITH THIS DEFEAT.

Since the second appeals officer was put in charge of the file in JANUARY 2014, he in turn has been replaced by a third person in SEPTEMBER 2014. At the time of publising a further 5 months have elapsed.

IS ALL THIS ACCIDENTAL?