Biller v. Canada (Attorney General), (2013) 433 F.T.R. 253 (FC)

• Judge: Manson, J.
• Court: Federal Court (Canada)
• Case Date: May 29, 2013
• Jurisdiction: Canada (Federal)
• Citations: (2013), 433 F.T.R. 253 (FC);2013 FC 588

Biller v. Can. (A.G.) (2013), 433 F.T.R. 253 (FC)

MLB headnote and full text

[French language version follows English language version]

[La version française vient à la suite de la version anglaise]

.........................

Temp. Cite: [2013] F.T.R. TBEd. JN.010

Howard Biller (applicant) v. Attorney General of Canada (respondent)

(T-1042-12; 2013 FC 588; 2013 CF 588)

Indexed As: Biller v. Canada (Attorney General)

Federal Court

Manson, J.

May 31, 2013.

Summary:

Biller was a distributor of health supplements for Immunotec. He failed to file goods and services tax returns for the years 2004, 2005, 2006 and 2007. The Minister of National Revenue assessed interest and late filing penalties on Biller for his failure to file tax returns on time as required under the Excise Tax Act. Biller applied for relief under s. 281.1 of the Act, claiming extraordinary circumstances. The Minister declined to waive the interest and penalties. Biller sought judicial review.

The Federal Court dismissed the application.

Sales and Service Taxes - Topic 5418

Goods and services tax (incl. harmonized sales tax) - Offences and penalties - Waiver of penalty and interest - Biller was a distributor of health supplements for Immunotec - He failed to file goods and services tax (GST) returns for the years 2004, 2005, 2006 and 2007 - The Minister of National Revenue assessed interest and late filing penalties on Biller for his failure to file tax returns on time as required under the Excise Tax Act - Biller applied for relief under s. 281.1 of the Act, claiming extraordinary circumstances - The Minister declined to waive the interest and penalties - The Federal Court dismissed Biller's application for judicial review - Each applicant had to file his or her return on time - Any errors attributable to third parties were not extraordinary circumstances - While the court had some sympathy for Biller's confusion regarding his duty to remit GST for his services rendered to Immunotec for which he was paid commissions, it was Biller's responsibility to ensure that he had proper remittances made and that he received the necessary advice from his accountant or otherwise to ensure compliance with his GST payment obligations - If he had received inadequate or improper advice from his accountant or Immunotec, those issues were separate from Canada Revenue Agency considerations.

Cases Noticed:

Telfer v. Canada Revenue Agency (2009), 386 N.R. 212; 2009 FCA 23, refd to. [para. 7].

Holmes v. Canada (Attorney General), [2010] F.T.R. Uned. 525; 2010 FC 809, refd to. [para. 7].

New Brunswick (Board of Management) v. Dunsmuir, [2008] 1 S.C.R. 190; 372 N.R. 1; 329 N.B.R.(2d) 1; 844 A.P.R. 1; 2008 SCC 9, refd to. [para. 8].

Knecht v. Canada (Attorney General) (2009), 353 F.T.R. 14; 2009 FC 940, refd to. [para. 9].

Quastel v. Canada Revenue Agency (2011), 384 F.T.R. 25; 2011 FC 143, refd to. [para. 10].

Babin v. Canada Customs and Revenue Agency, [2005] F.T.R. Uned. A34; 2005 FC 972, refd to. [para. 12].

Boonstra v. Canada (Attorney General) (2006), 300 F.T.R. 255; 2006 FC 1196, refd to. [para. 12].

Counsel:

Howard Biller, on his own behalf, for the applicant;

Amit Ummat, for the respondent.

Solicitors of Record:

William F. Pentney, Deputy Attorney General of Canada, Toronto, Ontario, for the respondent.

This application was heard at Toronto, Ontario, on May 29, 2013, by Manson, J., of the Federal Court, who delivered the following reasons for order at Ottawa, Ontario, on May 31, 2013.