Cases
Kyte v. The Queen, 97 DTC 5022, Docket: A-785-95 (FCA)
Although the amount of an assessment of the taxpayer under s. 227.1 was correct in dollar terms, the certificate issued by the Minister as required by s. 227.1(2)(a) was overstated. This error was found to be cured by s. 166.
Ginsberg v. Canada, 96 DTC 6372, [1996] 3 CTC 63 (FCA)
After noting that recent decisions have diminished the importance of the distinction between directory and mandatory provisions, Desjardins J.A. found that failure of the Minister to assess with all due dispatch as required by s. 152(1) did not invalidate a late assessment by the Minister.
See Also
Deneschuk Building Supplies Ltd. v. The Queen, 96 DTC 1467 (TCC)
The failure of the Minister to provide written notice before allocating business limits, as required by s. 125(4), was a substantial and fundamental error and, therefore, was not cured by s. 166.