In House, the Tax Court found that the appellant had failed to “demolish” assumptions pleaded by the Minister of Finance with respect to an asset that the Minister alleged should have been included in the appellant’s income. In so doing, the Court dismissed testimony from the appellant and his witnesses, and cited the appellant’s failure to produce any documentary evidence. In its review of the Tax Court's decision, the Federal Court of Appeal addressed the proper analysis to be conducted in determining whether a taxpayer has satisfied its onus to demolish the Minister’s assumptions. The Court found that the Tax Court judge had misapplied this analysis by failing to accept the testimony of the appellant and his witnesses in satisfaction of the taxpayer’s initial onus, where there were no credibility issues.

Read more by clicking the download button.