I should first mention that the reassessments for the 2004, 2005 and 2006 taxation years were made beyond the normal reassessment period which normally mean that the onus is on the Respondent to establish misrepresentation attributable to neglect, carelessness, wilful default or fraud for the purposes of subparagraph 152(4)(a)(i) of the Act. Since this point was not raised by the Appellant in her notice of appeal, the Respondent was not put on notice that such an onus had to be met (Bigayan v. Canada, [2000] 1 C.T.C. 29). With respect to the penalties imposed under subsection 163(2) of the Act, the onus is clearly on the Respondent to justify them.
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.