Concept
Burden Proof
Deyab v. Canada, 2020 FCA 222 / (2) Gross Negligence Penalties versus Reassessing a Statute-barred Year
"Subsection 163(3) of the Act provides that for any penalty assessed under subsection 163(2), “the burden of establishing the facts justifying the assessment of the penalty is on the Minister”. With respect to how the Minister could satisfy his or her onus of proof, the Minister could introduce evidence by cross-examining the taxpayer or by calling the taxpayer as a witness (Rule 146 of the Tax Court of Canada Rules (General Procedure), SOR/90-688a). The Minister could also call other witnesses, although generally the person with the most knowledge of the taxpayer’s affairs is the taxpayer. In this case, Mr. Deyab testified and the Minister had an opportunity to cross-examine him."
Related Ideas
- Distinct RequirementsDeyab v. Canada, 2020 FCA 222 · (1) The Decisions of this Court and the Tax Court in Lacroix
- Tax LiabilityDeyab v. Canada, 2020 FCA 222 · A. Burden of Proof
- Burden ProofDeyab v. Canada, 2020 FCA 222 · A. Burden of Proof
- Gross NegligenceDeyab v. Canada, 2020 FCA 222 · II. Decision of the Tax Court
- Appeal IssuesDeyab v. Canada, 2020 FCA 222 · III. Issues and Standard of Review
- Deyab ComparisonDeyab v. Canada, 2020 FCA 222 · (1) The Decisions of this Court and the Tax Court in Lacroix
- Tax CourtDeyab v. Canada, 2020 FCA 222 · C. The Application of Lacroix
- Prima FacieDeyab v. Canada, 2020 FCA 222 · B. Adverse Inference