Roland St-Onge:—The appeal of Mr W C Kennedy came before me at Toronto, Ontario on April 2, 1979, and the issue is whether the appellant is allowed to deduct certain expenses in his 1976 taxation year.
M J Bonner:—The appellant, in its return of income for the taxation year ending August 31, 1974, sought to deduct in computing income Canadian development expenses in the amount of $191,116 and Canadian exploration expenses in the amount of
The Assistant Chairman:—With his 1976 income tax return, the appellant filed a T-4 slip from each of his two employers in that year, which slips totalled $32,105,83. From this amount he deducted an amount of $8,000, that he classified as a
M J Bonner:—The appellant has been assessed to tax on capital gains realized on the sale, in 1972 and 1973, of shares of Canadian Hidrogas Resources Ltd (hereinafter called “the company’’). The company was a public company, the shares of which
Roland St-Onge [TRANSLATION]:—The appeal of Mr Gilles Maillé came before me on May 31, 1978 at Sherbrooke, Quebec. The Board must decide whether property transactions occurring in the 1973 taxation year gave rise to capital gains or business income.
Guy Tremblay [TRANSLATION]:—This case was heard in Quebec City, Quebec on December 8, 1977.
Guy Tremblay [TRANSLATION]:—This case was heard in Montreal, Quebec on May 16, 1978.
Guy Tremblay [TRANSLATION]:—The case at bar was heard jointly with the cases of Jean-Pierre Laurin (77-1289), Jean-Guy Laurin (77-1288) and Laurent Laurin (78-63) in Montreal, Quebec on May 17, 1978.
The reasons for judgment given in the case of Jean-Pierre Laurin apply mutatis mutandis to the case at bar.
The appeal is allowed in part and the whole is referred back to the respondent for reassessment in accordance with the above-mentioned reasons for judgment.
Guy Tremblay [TRANSLATION]:—The case at bar was heard jointly with the cases of Jean-Pierre Laurin (77-1289), Hubert Laurin (77-1308) and Laurent Laurin (78-63) in Montreal, Quebec on May 17, 1978.
The reasons for judgment given in the Jean-Pierre Laurin case apply mutatis mutandis to the case at bar.
The appeal is allowed in part and the whole is referred back to the respondent for reassessment in accordance with the above-mentioned reasons for judgment.
Appeal allowed in part.
Guy Tremblay [TRANSLATION]:—This case was heard at Montreal, Quebec on May 17, 1978, on common evidence with the cases of Jean-Guy Laurin (77-1288), Hubert Laurin (77-1308) and Laurent Laurin (78-63).
