Beaubier, T.C.CJ.:—This appeal was heard in Saskatoon, Saskatchewan on October 6, 1992. It is an appeal pursuant to the informal procedure of this Court.

Teskey, T.C.C.J.:—The appellant elected to have his appeal against his 1988 assessment for tax heard pursuant to the informal procedure.

Rowe, D.T.C.C.J.:—The appellant appeals from a reassessment of income tax for the 1989 taxation year. In computing income tax for the 1989 taxation year the appellant claimed a refundable investment tax credit in the amount of $6,485 in respect of

Rowe, D .T.C.C.).:—The appellant appeals from a reassessment of income tax for her 1990 taxation year. In filing her income tax return for the 1990 taxation year the appellant did not report any child maintenance payments received by her in the

Christie, A.C.T.C.C.J.:— The year under review is 1984. The issue is whether the profit realized by the appellant on the disposition of shares of General American Technologies Inc. is business income or a capital gain. In response to an offering

Brulé, T.C.C.J.:—The respondent has brought a Motion under Rule 54 of the Tax Court of Canada Rules for leave to amend the reply to the notice of appeal (reply). The proposed amendment by way of an addition to the reply reads as follows:

Hamlyn, T.C.C.J.:—The appeal of Araz Developments Inc. ("Araz Developments") is in relation to a sale of a property situated on Lawrence Avenue in the City of Toronto (the "Lawrence property"). The appeal of the other four appellants is in relation to

Christie, A.C.T.C.C.J.:— The year under review in both appeals is 1984. They arise out of similar transactions and the facts relevant to the determination of them are the same. It was agreed by the litigants that only the appeal of Paul Morello would be

Bonner, T.C.C.J. (orally):—The appellant appeals under the informal procedure provisions of the Tax Court of Canada Act from assessments under the Income Tax Act, R.S.C. 1952, c. 148 (am. S.C. 1970-71-72, c.

Mogan, T.C.C.J. (orally):—This is an appeal in respect of the 1991 taxation year and the appellant has elected the Informal Procedure. The issue in the case relates to deductions permitted as premiums or contributions payable to a registered retirement