Federal court | Tax | Goods and services tax | Administration and enforcement
Registrant WSCU received letter stating that it was not “credit union” as defined in Income Tax Act so it did not qualify as “credit union” under Excise Tax Act, but Minister of National Revenue did not propose to issue reassessment. Registrant brought application for judicial review of “decision”. Minister brought motion to strike application. Motion dismissed. In absence of tax assessment, application was not bereft of any possibility of success. Even though potential liability for tax was possible issue, many issues fell outside exclusive jurisdiction of Tax Court, which appeared to be limited to assessment and tax appeals. True character of application for judicial review could not relate to assessment that did not exist. If it was not certain whether s. 18.5 of Federal Courts Act barred judicial review, application should not be struck. Without letter, it was not possible to conclude that it was not possible to quash “decision”. Without adequate record, it was inappropriate to resolve novel issue.
Westminster Savings Credit Union v. Canada (Attorney General) (2019), 2019 CarswellNat 996, 2019 FC 304, Yvan Roy J. (F.C.).