Christie, A.C.J.T.C.:—The dispute is over whether in computing her income for her 1982 taxation year the appellant is entitled to deduct $4,437.57 in travelling expenses pertaining to the use of her automobile in discharging the duties of her employment. This

Tremblay, T.C.J. [Translation]:—This appeal was heard on October 18, 1985 at Montreal, Quebec.

Couture, C.J.T.C.:—The appellant filed an appeal against an assessment for the taxation year 1981 and acting on his own behalf disclosed the following facts.

Kempo, T.C.J.:—By application and on consent, the appeals of Dr. William Fleming and his wife, Stella Fleming, were heard on common evidence. At all times material the appellants had operated a farm business in partnership. The issue and years under

Kempo, T.C.J.:—The issue in this appeal as to the appellant's 1980 taxation year is the fair market value as at December 31, 1971 ("Valuation Day”) of a 72-acre parcel of land (Pt. S /2 Lot 32 and 31, Concession 5, Township of London

Brulé, T.C.l.:—This appeal involves the matter of penalties only, dealing with the taxpayer's 1980 and 1981 taxation years, it being agreed that any appeal for the 1979 year is dismissed.

Kempo, T.C.J.:— This appeal concerns the appellant’s 1982 taxation year. The parties hereto have jointly agreed that the merits of the appeal should be adjudicated on the basis of an agreed statement of facts and written submissions. The same have been

Kempo, T.C.l.:—This appeal concerns the appellant’s 1982 taxation year. The parties hereto have jointly agreed that the merits of the appeal should be adjudicated on the basis of an agreed statement of facts and written submissions. The same have been

Goetz, T.C.J.:—The appellant is appealing the Minister's reassessments with respect to its 1979, 1980 and 1981 taxation years, whereby certain reserves sought to be claimed by the appellant were added back into income.

Taylor, T.C.J.:—This is an appeal heard in Ottawa, Ontario, on July 7, 1986, against an income tax reassessment for the year 1981, because the Minister of National Revenue originally had allowed, and then disallowed as a deduction, an amount