So Mr. Salisman asked the CRA to extend the time for him to file his return, under its taxpayer relief power, so he could qualify for the lower tax amount. CRA twice refused and he applied to the Federal Court for judicial review of the CRA’s decision.
" Throughout his oral submissions before the Court, Mr. Sailsman kept referring to the fact that he would have expected a much better service on the part of the CRA, like the services financial institutions provide to their clients. These expectations were simply misplaced.
" Unlike financial institutions, the CRA is not a commercial undertaking offering its products and services in an open, competitive market. The CRA is a creature of statute whose mandate is to administer an income tax system that relies on self reporting by taxpayers. To that end, the Act gives the CRA broad powers in supervising the scheme of assessing and auditing taxpayers. In such context, the CRA and the taxpayers have opposing interests. Their relationship is therefore not one where the CRA should be responsible for protecting taxpayers from losses arising from their assessments (Leighton v Canada (Attorney General), 2012 BCSC 961 (CanLII), at para 54). Rather, it is that of debtor-creditor, governed by statute and in a sense, adverse. As a result, absent a breach of the powers in the Act, the CRA has no duty towards a taxpayer other than to act in accordance with the Act for the purposes of the Act (Humby v Central Springs Ltd. 2013 FC 1136 (CanLII), at paras 118-122).
See Sailsman v. Canada (National Revenue), 2014 FC (LeBlanc)