Heald, J:—This is an appeal from respondent’s income tax assessment of the appellant for the 1966 taxation year. By agreement of counsel, this appeal was tried together with the appeal of Bernard Lehrer in which latter appeal written Reasons for Judgment have been delivered this day under No T-1381-71 of this Court.
The present appeal arises from the same transaction which gave rise to the appeal of Bernard Lehrer.
The appellant is the sister of said Bernard Lehrer and was a fiftyfifty partner with him in subject transaction and most of the other transactions detailed in the Lehrer judgment.
She described herself as the silent partner in these transactions and agreed that Bernard Lehrer was the active and dominant partner. It has been decided in a number of cases that a non-active or silent partner who is quite content to leave the handling of the business to another partner is in no different position than that of the active partner (see MNR v Lane, [1964] CTC 81; Carr v MNR, [1965] CTC 334).
The appeal is therefore dismissed with costs.
Email this Content