Digests

Decision Information

Decision Content

INCOME TAX

Reassessment

Matte v. Canada

A-115-02

2003 FCA 19, Strayer J.A.

16/1/03

7 pp.

Application for judicial review of Tax Court of Canada decision confirming reassessment by M.N.R. requiring applicant to repay $391.75--Amount said to be overpayment to applicant of child tax credit in respect of month of August, 1998--Applicant applied for child tax benefit for month of August, 1998, stating applicant had become primary caregiver --M.N.R. paid child tax benefit to applicant but later determined applicant not entitled as applicant not eligible individual within meaning of Income Tax Act, s. 122.6-- Court stated no legal barrier to non-custodial parent considered as eligible individual for period as short as one month, as herein--ITA, s. 122.6 defining "eligible individual" --Definition clearly contemplating eligible individual may change from time to time, as long as at relevant time, eligible individual primarily fulfilling responsibility of caregiver-- Formula for calculating amount of benefits payable found in ITA, s. 122.61--Amount based on deemed repayment of notional overpayment of taxes--According to formula, eligible individual can receive 1/12 of annual rate of benefits as prescribed in s. 122.61--Minimum benefit period one month and month of benefits to be paid to whomever eligible individual at beginning of month, thus, to person primarily fulfilling responsibility for care and upbringing of child at time in question--Not necessary to do per diem calculations because of change of caregiver sometime during month--Not necessary changes in caregivers must occur in strict correspondence with calendar months--Otherwise, in case like present case, neither parents would have been able to claim for August--Court concluded Tax Court Judge erred in finding as matter of law applicant mother, non-custodial parent, could not be eligible for child tax benefit for month of August, 1998, because former partner was at other times of year eligible individual--Therefore Tax Court Judge erred in law in interpreting definition of eligible individual--Appeal allowed, matter referred back to Minister for reassessment-- Income Tax Act, R.S.C., 1985 (5th Supp.), c. 1, ss. 122.6 (as enacted by S.C. 1994, c. 7, Sch. VII, s. 12; 1998, c. 19, s. 140), 122.61 (as enacted by S.C. 1994, c. 7, Sch. VII, s. 12; 1998, c. 21, s. 93).

 You are being directed to the most recent version of the statute which may not be the version considered at the time of the judgment.