Beaubier T.C.J.:
This appeal pursuant to the Informal Procedure was heard at Edmonton, Alberta on July 15, 1998. The Appellant was the only witness. The Appellant resides in St. Albert, Alberta and is a personal trainer.
Hamlyn T.C.J.:
These appeals are in respect of the Appellant’s 1991, 1992 and 1993 taxation years.
In computing income for the 1991, 1992 and 1993 taxation years, the Appellant, Elan Development Ltd. (“Elan”), claimed the small business deduction.
In reassessing the Appellant for the 1991, 1992 and 1993 taxation years, the Minister of National Revenue (the “Minister”) disallowed the said deduction.
At the hearing, the parties filed a Statement of Agreed Facts. It reads:
McArthur T.C.J.:
This is the appeal of David Ciebien from the Minister of National Revenue’s reassessment of the Appellant’s 1990, 1991 and 1992 taxation years. The Appellant sought to deduct the amounts of $50,780, $65,777 and $70,840 — I have dropped the cents — being purported business losses from the operation of two hair salons. The Appellant later revised his claim to $50,942, $101,961 and $95,321 in losses for those years respectively.
McArthur T.C.J.:
Tanasychuk B., T.O., T.C.C.:
This taxation came on for hearing on May 27, 1998, by means of a telephone conference call. It follows a Judgment of the Honourable Judge O’Connor dated March 11, 1997, in which he dismissed the appeals made under the Income Tax Act with respect to the 1990 and 1991 taxation years, with costs.
Beaubier T.C.J.:
This appeal pursuant to the Informal Procedure was heard at Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, on July 2, 1998. The Appellant and his wife, Sylvia, testified.
The Appellant claimed the northern resident’s deduction for 1994 and 1995. It was disallowed. He appealed.
The assumptions in paragraph 10 of the Reply to the Notice of Appeal read:
10 In so reassessing the Appellant, the Minister made the following assumptions of fact:
McArthur T.C.J. (orally):
THE REGISTRAR: The Court will now register its decision on File No. 97-3355(IT) between Richard John Taylor and Her Majesty the Queen.
Mr. Taylor is present and representing himself, and Shalene Curtis- Micallef is here representing Her Majesty the Queen.
HIS HONOUR: The Appellant appeals his 1994 taxation year assessment. The Minister of National Revenue disallowed the Appellant’s deduction for business losses in the amount of $12,778.
Hamlyn T.C.J.:
This is a motion for:
• an Order requiring the Appellant to file and serve a further and better affidavit of documents which includes the documents which it permitted Revenue Canada auditors to inspect at the offices of Gowling, Strathy & Henderson on January 11, 1991;
Bowie T.C.J.:
The issue in this appeal is whether the Appellant, in computing its income under the Income Tax Act (the Act) for the 1990 taxation year, was entitled to deduct an amount of $26,089,145 as a writedown of deposits on land for development, including preliminary development costs expended in connection therewith. The development costs consist primarily of interest upon money borrowed for the purpose of making the deposits.
O’Connor T C.J.:
These appeals were heard on common evidence at Calgary, Alberta on April 21, 22 and 23, 1998.
Several witnesses were heard and copious exhibits were filed.
There are three issues, namely:
1. Whether an alleged management fee of $190,000 paid or accrued by Airtex Industries Ltd. (“Airtex”) to its wholly owned U.S. subsidiary, Airtex Inc. in the 1989 taxation year was deductible.
