Concept
Appeal Issues
Deyab v. Canada, 2020 FCA 222 / III. Issues and Standard of Review
"[17]\n\nMr. Deyab raised three issues in his memorandum of fact and law. Mr. Deyab submitted that the Tax Court Judge erred in:\n\n(a)\n\nshifting the burden of proof from the Minister to Mr. Deyab in relation to reassessing the statute barred years and assessing gross negligence penalties;\n\n(b)\n\nrelying on adverse inferences that he drew against Mr. Deyab before the Minister had established a prima facie case; and\n\n(c)\n\nmisapplying the evidence to the legal test in Lacroix."
Related Ideas
- Appeal IssuesDeyab v. Canada, 2020 FCA 222 · IV. Analysis
- Burden ProofDeyab v. Canada, 2020 FCA 222 · A. Burden of Proof
- Adverse InferencesDeyab v. Canada, 2020 FCA 222 · B. Adverse Inference
- Prima FacieDeyab v. Canada, 2020 FCA 222 · B. Adverse Inference
- Tax CourtDeyab v. Canada, 2020 FCA 222 · C. The Application of Lacroix
- Reassessment RequirementsDeyab v. Canada, 2020 FCA 222 · (2) Gross Negligence Penalties versus Reassessing a Statute-barred Year
- Burden ProofDeyab v. Canada, 2020 FCA 222 · (2) Gross Negligence Penalties versus Reassessing a Statute-barred Year
- Penalty TestDeyab v. Canada, 2020 FCA 222 · (3) The Tax Court Judge’s Errors