Cattanach, J:—This is an appeal from a decision of the Tax Review Board whereby a penalty in the amount of $6,844.92 imposed by the Minister of National Revenue upon the defendant for its 1973 taxation year pursuant to subsection 163(2) of the

The Associate Chief Justice:—The facts in this case are neither complicated nor unique and they formed the subject of an agreed statement of facts by counsel as follows:

Urie, J:—This is an appeal from a judgment of the Trial Division whereby the appellant’s appeal from reassessments for income tax made by the Minister of National Revenue (hereinafter referred to as “the Minister”) for the taxation years 1966, 1967 and

Heald, J:—This is an appeal from a judgment of the Trial Division which allowed the respondent’s appeal from a reassessment for income tax in respect of the respondent’s 1972 fiscal year which ended on October 31, 1972. The Trial Division judgment

Mahoney, J:—The plaintiff appeals the decision of the Tax Review Board [1978] CTC 3130; 78 DTC 1787, that upheld disallowance of two outlays as expenses: (1) a $20,000 payment in 1969 to obtain releases from commitments and (2) a series of payments

Gibson, J:—Paul A Klie appeals from a decision of the Tax Review Board on an appeal from assessments for income tax for his taxation years 1971 and 1972 relating to deductions of losses from farming from the total of his income from all

The Chief Justice:—We do not need to hear you Mr Gill.

Harradence, J:—The corporate and individual accused were jointly charged with wilfully evading payment of income tax between December 1964 and March 1970, contrary to paragraph 239(1 )(d) of the Income Tax Act, SC 1970-71-72 c 63.

Marceau, J:—The taxpayer-defendant, an economist, comes from Argentina by has been for some years residing and working in Montreal, PQ. In computing his taxable income for the year 1976, the defendant claimed a special deduction of $2,965.38, being an amount

Décary, J [TRANSLATION]:—The question is whether the amount of $8,000 paid by defendant to his ex-wife during the 1976 taxation year, an amount which is part of a sum of $20,000 which defendant is required to pay as the result of a divorce