A SR&ED appeal by Murray Arlin Dentistry Professional Corporation was dismissed by the Honourable Justice J.M. Woods. The agents for the appellant, Julie Bond and Mauricio Haliska, appealed 2 elements of the SR&ED requirements:
1. Whether there was systematic investigation, and
2. Whether the allocation of Dr. Arlin’s time was reasonable.
The appellant, a professional corporation that operates the dental practice of Dr. Murray Arlin, made claims under the Income Tax Act for investment tax credits (and SR&ED expenditures) in each of the 2007 and 2008 taxation years. Dr. Arlin, a periodontist, specialized in dental implants, and purchased a program called the Tritan Dental Implant Management System 15 years ago to track the success rate of various types of dental implants. Dr. Arlin used the software to compare the success rate of implants under different variables, which was used in his practice, and by other dentists through dissemination in publications and lectures.
According to Justice J.M. Woods, who dismissed the appeal, the evidence was too vague to establish the time spent by Dr. Arlin on analysis or data collection, and there was very little detailed evidence regarding the analysis conducted.
