Bell T.C.J.:
The issues in this appeal are:
I. Whether mortgage debt of a partnership of which the Appellant was a member was extinguished in his 1989 taxation year. The Minister of National Revenue (“Minister”) reassessed the Appellant for that year adding capital gain in the sum of $84,499 and adding recaptured capital cost allowance in the sum of $31,275; and
Lamarre Proulx T.C.J.:
These appeals were heard on common evidence under the informal procedure. They concern the application of paragraph 8(1)() and subparagraph 8( 1 )(i)(iii) of the Income Tax Act ("the Act’) for the 1994 taxation year.
The issue is whether the appellants, in computing their employment income, can deduct the cost of purchasing the computers they acquired under their contracts of employment.
Beaubier T . C.J.:
This appeal pursuant to the informal procedure was heard at Vancouver, British Columbia on October 6th, 1998. The Appellant testified, the Respondent called its auditor on the file, Robert Bidlake.
At the outset, the Appellant’s agent acknowledged liability for most of the assessments. As a result, two assessments remained in dispute between the parties. They are dealt with as follows:
Bell T.C.J.:
This is an application under section 167 of the Income Tax Act (“Act”) for an Order extending the time within which an appeal may be instituted.
The Applicant, through his counsel, by letter of June 5, 1998 requested the above extension of time.
Lamarre T.C.J.:
Lamarre Proulx T.C.J. .
This is an appeal from an assessment made by the Minister of National Revenue (“the Minister”) for the 1995 taxation year.
The issue is whether the appellant is entitled to the physical impairment tax credit provided for in section 118.3 of the Income Tax Act (“the Act”) because of gluten-sensitive enteropathy, commonly known as celiac disease.
Tardif T.C.J.:
This is an appeal for the 1993 taxation year.
The appellant testified in support of his appeal; he explained that he had guaranteed a $34,000 loan made to Jean-Guy Asselin personally by the Na- tional Bank of Canada on June 12, 1989.
As he knew Jean-Guy Asselin well, the appellant agreed to guarantee it so he could obtain the loan in the aforesaid amount in order to invest in the company 2644-8472 Québec Inc., for which he was working. This was a business which printed documents.
Tremblay T . C.J.:
According to the Notice of Appeal and the Reply to the Notice of Appeal, the question is whether the appellant is correct in maintaining that she is not liable under s. 160 of the Income Tax Act (“the Act”) to pay tax in the amount of $20,451.78.
Bonner T.C.J. .
This is an appeal from an assessment of income tax for the Appellant’s 1995 taxation year. The assessment was made on the basis that section 79 of the Income Tax Act (“Act”) required the inclusion in income of $1,343,384 as the deemed proceeds of disposition of a parcel of land in Milton, Ontario.
The Appellant is a land developer. The land in question was acquired in 1990 by 731418 Ontario Inc. (“731418”). It is common ground that 731418 acted at all relevant times as trustee for the Appellant.
Bowman T . C.]. :
This appeal is from reassessment for the 1995 taxation year whereby the Minister of National Revenue disallowed the sum of $12,000 claimed by the appellant as alimony or maintenance paid to his estranged spouse under paragraph 60(b) of the Income Tax Act.
The appellant and his spouse had a history of matrimonial difficulties. They have separated and attempted reconciliation on at least two occasions. They are now in the process of obtaining a divorce.
