Aliza Kornfeld, Charles Balint v. Minister of National Revenue, [1980] CTC 2938, 80 DTC 1827 -- text

M J Bonner:—These appeals were heard together on common evidence. The appellants appealed from assessments of income tax made on the basis that profits realized on the sale in 1974 and 1976 of certain land were income.

Thomas B Scott, Morley H Malyon v. Minister of National Revenue, [1980] CTC 2935, 80 DTC 1824 -- text

M J Bonner:—These appeals were heard together on common evidence. Each appellant appeals from assessments of income tax for the 1974, 1975 and 1976 taxation years. For 1974 the Minister included in income the gain realized on the sale of land

Anilkant Mody, Kumud Mody v. Minister of National Revenue, [1980] CTC 2932, 80 DTC 1832 -- text

The Chairman:—The appeals of Mr Anilkant Mody and Mrs Kumud Mody were heard on common evidence. The issue is whether the amount of profits realized by the appellants in the disposition of certain properties in the taxation years 1974 and 1975 are

Robert C Rickerd v. Minister of National Revenue, [1980] CTC 2929, 80 DTC 1838 -- text

The Chairman:— The appeal of Robert C Rickerd is from an assessment in respect of the 1976, 1977 and 1978 taxation years, for which the appellant claimed business expenses in the amounts of $4,109.72, $3,549.16 and $4,686.67 respectively. Of those

Beverly Henderson, Eugene Henderson v. Minister of National Revenue, [1980] CTC 2919, 80 DTC 1806 -- text

Roland St-Onge:— The appeals of Beverley and Eugene Henderson came before me on October 16 and 17, 1980, at the City of Toronto, Ontario and were heard on common evidence. The issue is whether the appellants failed to report income on

Wilstan Construction Limited, Ruland Realty Limited, Manzon Realty Limited, King’s Cove Investments Limited, William Sorokolit Realty Limited, Frank Lon Properties Limited, Ren Lon Properties Limited, Lar Lon Properties Limited, Mamor Realty Limited v. Minister of National Revenue, [1980] CTC 2919, 80 DTC 1780 -- text

John B Goetz:—It was agreed when these appeals were called for hearing that these appeals would abide the decision in the appeal of Agri Holdings Limited v MNR. For the reasons given therein, copy of which is attached, these appeal are dismissed.

Appeals dismissed.

Pages

Subscribe to Tax Interpretations RSS