Dubienski, D.J.T.C. [Orally]: —I think on the basis of the evidence before me, including all comments in the statement of facts supplied by the appellant, that the initial endeavours with Mr. Potter of Delta Information Services Inc. was for the purpose
Christie, A.CJ.T.C.:—The question to be answered is whether the appellant is jointly and severally liable with Lillian Smith Travel Consultants Ltd. ("Travel Consultants") for its failure to remit federal income tax deducted by it at source in respect of its
Dubienski, T.CJ.:—The corporate appellant and the other appellants operate a business as a Canadian-controlled private corporation that deals in wholesale flowers.
Dussault, T.C.J.:—These appeals were heard on common evidence. They are appeals from assessments issued by the respondent on May 5, 1987, under subsection 227(10) of the Income Tax Act, RJ .C. 1952, c. 148 (am. S.C. 1970-71-72,
Rip, T.C.J.:—Aaron Gelber ("Gelber") and Norman Sternthal ("Sternthal") appeal from assessments with respect to their 1982 taxation year in which the Minister of National Revenue ("Minister"), the respondent, disallowed expenses deducted by each of them in computing
Sobier, T.CJ.:—These appeals were heard on common evidence.
Counsel for the appellants and respondent produced and filed an agreed statement of facts.
Taylor, T.C.J.:—These are appeals heard on common evidence at London, Ontario on July 9 and 10, 1991 against income tax assessments, in which the Minister of National Revenue ("respondent") had disallowed a claim for an operational loss for the taxation
Lamarre Proulx, T.C.J.: —This is an appeal from an assessment of tax for the year 1988.
Rip, T.C.J.:— The issue in this appeal is whether the appellant, Pazner Scrap Metals Company Ltd. ("Scrap"), ought to be allowed to deduct an amount of $103,725 in computing income for 1987 on the basis the amount was an expense, referred to
Mogan, T.C.J.: — The appeals of John M. Fedyna v. M.N.R. (88-84IT) and Fedyna Construction Ltd. v. M.N.R. (88-184IT) were heard together on common evidence. In these reasons for judgment, John M. Fedyna will be referred to as “the appellant"
