Taylor, TCJ:—This is an appeal heard in Belleville, Ontario, on January 8, 1985, against income tax assessments for the years 1977, 1978, 1979 and 1980 in which the Minister of National Revenue treated the appellant as a sole proprietor,

Taylor, TCJ:—These are appeals heard in Toronto, Ontario, on November 21, 1984 against income tax assessments for the years 1979 and 1980 in which the Minister of National Revenue taxed the appellant as an employee, rather than as an independent contractor; and even

Christie, ACJTC:—This appeal relates to the appellant’s 1980 taxation year. The issue is whether she is entitled to deduct certain expenses claimed by her as a commission saleswoman. She was employed under a verbal contract by a corpo- ration to sell

Bonner, TCJ:—This is an appeal from an assessment of income tax for the 1976 taxation year. The sole issue is the value on December 31, 1971, of a parcel of real property in Guelph, Ontario, sold during 1976 by the late Mr Wolfond. The

Taylor, TCJ:—This is an appeal heard in Toronto, Ontario, on December 4, 1984, against an income tax assessment for the year 1981 in which the Minister of National Revenue added to income the proceeds of a Registered Home Ownership Savings Plan

Taylor, TCJ [TRANSLATION]:—This appeal was heard in the city of Montreal on October 18, 1984. The issue is whether the appellant was entitled to deduct certain expenses as “automobile expenses” in the computation of his taxable income.

Rip, TCJ [TRANSLATION]:—The appellant appealed tax assessments for the 1977, 1978 and 1979 taxation years in which the Minister of National Revenue, the respondent, included the profits from the sale of certain buildings as income in the appellant’s income for

Rip, TCJ [TRANSLATION]:—The appeals by Jean-Pierre Longpré and his wife Michèle Longpré were heard on common evidence. Mr Longpré filed an appeal from assessments for the 1978, 1979 and 1980 taxation years, and Mrs Longpré filed an appeal from an

Sarchuk, TCJ:—These appeals are from income tax reassessments for the appellant’s 1977, 1978 and 1979 taxation years. At issue is the deduction of certain “carrying charges” (mortgage interest and realty taxes) which “carrying charges” pertained to a piece of

The appeal is allowed and the matter referred back to the respondent for reconsideration and reassessment on the basis that the amount of $8,517 received by the appellant in the 1977 taxation year was an award for damages for breach of contract and is