Teskey T.C.J. (orally):

HIS HONOUR: This appeal came on for hearing this 16th day of September.

The Respondent produced a motion to have the appeal dismissed as the Appellant in essence was not appealing the assessment of tax for the taxation year 1996. The Respondent asked to put the Appellant in the witness box, and the Appellant said, well I want to make a statement. A statement he gave, and it’s accepted, and therefore there is no need for him to be sworn and put formally in the box.

Bell T.C.J.:

The issue is whether Edward B. Duncan ("Duncan") was entitled to a deduction for motor vehicle travel expenses in respect of his 1995 taxation year and whether Mary J. Duncan (“Mary”) was entitled to such a deduction for her 1994 and 1995 taxation years. Although Edward filed a Notice of Appeal for his 1995 taxation year, he abandoned same at the hearing.

Bowman T. C.]. :

These appeals are from assessments for the 1985, 1986, 1987, 1988 and 1989 taxation years.

Essentially, the question is the computation of the appellant’s income for those years from carrying on a business of operating a number of sex boutiques in which various types of erotica are sold.

The appellant failed to file income tax returns for the years in question. Upon being served with a requirement to do so he filed returns and reported income as follows:

Rip T.C.J.:

Shane C. Gabie has appealed income tax assessments for 1993 and 1994 in which the Minister of National Revenue (“Minister”) disallowed claims for an Overseas Employment Tax Credit (“OETC”) pursuant to section 122.3 of the Income Tax Act (“Act”).

Christie A.C.J.T.C.:

These appeals are governed by the Informal Procedure prescribed under section 18 and following sections of the Tax Court of Canada Act. The years under review are 1994 and 1995.

The issues to be determined are whether the appellant is entitled to deduct $9,788.00 in computing his income for 1994 and to deduct $7,223.00 for the same purpose in respect of 1995. It is alleged that these were alimony or maintenance payments.[1]

Beaubier T.C.J.: (L6/R4294/T0/BT0) test_marked_paragraph_end (2916) 0.775 0519_7193_7325

This appeal pursuant to the Informal Procedure was heard at Edmonton, Alberta on August 11, 1998. The Appellant was the only witness.

The Appellant has appealled the disallowance of her claim for the disability tax credit for 1995.

The applicable portions of the Income Tax Act respecting this appeal read:

118.3 (1) (1) Credit for mental or physical impairment.

Where

Bell T.C.J.:

Issue (L8/R5200/T0/BT0) test_marked_paragraph_end (492) 1.023 0512_4613_4743

The issue is whether employment income received by the Appellant in 1991, 1992 and 1993 is exempt from taxation pursuant to paragraph 81(1)(a) of the Income Tax Act (“Act’) and section 87 of the Indian Act. The term “Appellant” in these Reasons shall refer to each of Margaret Amos and Soloman Mark.

Bowman T.C.J.:

This appeal is from an assessment for 1995 whereby the Minister of National Revenue denied the appellant’s claim for a disability tax credit under section 118.3 of the Income Tax Act.

The appellant at the time of hearing in 1998 was 56 years of age. He has not worked since 1990, and has been receiving a disability pension.

McArthur T.C.J.:

This appeal is from assessments by the Minister of National Revenue (the “Minister”) wherein the Minister added to the Appellant’s income $2,086.60 and $760.50 in 1995 and 1996 respectively. These amounts were the value attached to a complimentary parks pass given to the Appellant by the City of Burnaby, British Columbia.

McArthur T . C.J.:

The Respondent applies for an order dismissing the Appellant’s appeal on the ground that it does not conform with the requirements of section 169 of the Income Tax Act (Act), in that the Appellant did not serve a Notice of Objection on the Minister of National Revenue.

The Appellant considered letters she wrote to the Regional Office of Revenue Canada and to Active Bailiff Service Limited were a valid Notice of Appeal.