Lamarre Proulx T.C.J.:

These appeals were heard under the informal procedure. They were heard together but not on common evidence. The grounds of appeal and the taxation year are different for each appellant, though the appeals concern the same point of law, namely a gift within the meaning of s. 118.1 of the Income Tax Act ("the Act”).

Margeson T.C.J. .

Beaubier T.C.J.:

This appeal pursuant to the General Procedure was heard at Vancouver, British Columbia on October 8, 1998.

Paragraphs I to 3 and 5 to 15 inclusive of the Notice of Appeal were admitted in the Reply. Paragraph 16 of the Notice of Appeal describes the issue. They read:

1. The Appellant Robert McNeil] is a chartered accountant who resides at Site 41, RR#2, Gabriola Island, British Columbia, VOR 1X0

McArthur T.C.J.:

The Appellant, Ron Manke, appeals from assessments under the Income Tax Act (the “Act”) in respect of the 1990, 1991, 1992 and 1993 taxation years.

The basic facts in this appeal are as follows. The Appellant was an employee of Corporate Computers Inc., a corporation carrying on business in Edmonton, Alberta. He was a commissioned salesman selling computer hardware and software, and also had a side “business” as a computer consultant in the 1990, 1991 and 1992 taxation years.

Hamlyn T.C.J.:

In computing income for the 1993, 1994 and 1995 taxation years, the Appellant claimed as investment counsel fees the amount of $11,301 for 1993, $12,940 for 1994 and $20,762 for 1995.

In reassessing the Appellant for the 1993, 1994 and 1995 taxation years, the Minister of National Revenue (the “Minister”) reduced the claim for investment counsel fees by $10,801, from $11,301 to $500 for 1993, by $12,440, from $12,940 to $500 for 1994 and by $20,262, from $20,762 to $500 for 1995.

Hamlyn T.C.J.:

THE REGISTRAR: Order. Please rise. Court is resumed. Please be seated.

HIS HONOUR: This is in the matter of Joan Tingley and Her Majesty the Queen. It’s an appeal for the 1993, 1994, and 1995 taxation years.

At all relevant times, the appellant was resident in Canada, and the appellant received pension income from United Steel Workers of America, a source in the United States, for the 1993, 1994, and 1995 taxation years.

Lamarre T.C.J.:

These are appeals under the informal procedure from assessments made by the Minister of National Revenue (“Minister”) under the Income Tax Act (“Act”) for the appellant’s 1986, 1987, 1988 and 1989 taxation years. In so assessing the appellant, the Minister disallowed capital cost allowance on rental properties (class 3 assets) for each of the taxation years at issue, the amounts involved being $23,042, $17,907, $12,962 and $10,460 respectively. The Minister relied on the following assumptions of fact:

Lamarre Proulx T.C.J.:

These are appeals for the years 1986, 1987 and 1988. The Appellant was reassessed for these years for unreported income in the approximate amounts of $10,000, $40,000 and $100,000 respectively. Penalties were also assessed pursuant to subsection 163(2) of the Income Tax Act (the “Act’).

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

These appeals are governed by the informal procedure provided for under section 18 and following sections of the Tax Court of Canada Act. The years under appeal are 1992, 1993, 1994. The appellants are husband and wife and the appeals were heard together.

The Notice of Appeal filed by Jason Leung reads:

Bowman T.C.J.:

These appeals are from assessments for 1991, 1992, 1993, 1994 and 1995.

There are two issues:

(a) the deductibility of legal expenses incurred by the appellant in 1993, 1994 and 1995;

(b) the deductibility of certain business expenses claimed by the appellant in 1991 and 1992.

The appellant in the years in question was a self-employed associate with Financial Concept Group.