Rowe, D.T.C.C.J.:—The appellant, Douglas W. Sandner, appeals from a reassessment of income tax with respect to his 1982 and 1983 taxation years. Also appealing from reassessments of income tax on the same matter were Kenneth G. Sandner—87-2170(IT) and Charles
Taylor, T.C.C.J. (orally):—These are the appeals of Aaron Kain and Karen Neskar-Kain with respect to the 1987 taxation years. The amounts at issue are, in the case of Aaron Kain, $23,500, and in the case of Karen Neskar-Kain, $19,500, received
P.R. Dussault, T.C.C.J.:—This appeal was heard pursuant to the informal procedure. It is an appeal from a reassessment for the appellant's 1989 taxation year by which the Minister of National Revenue (the" Minister") disallowed the deduction of $12,500
Garon, T.C.C.J.:—This appeal is governed by the provisions of the Tax Court of Canada Act and the Tax Court of Canada Rules applicable to the informal procedure.
Taylor, J. (orally):—These are appeals heard on common evidence from David Collins and Judith Collins with respect to the taxation years 1983 through 1986. The point is that during those years, as partners in a business called Princess Yachts, they
Bonner, T.C.C.J.:—This is an appeal from an assessment under the Income Tax Act, R.S.C. 1952, c. 148 (am. S.C. 1970-71-72, c. 63) (the "Act") for the 1987 taxation year. In 1987 the appellant bought three parcels of real estate which
Teskey, T.C.C.J.:—The appellant elected to have his appeals against assessments for 1985 and 1989 heard pursuant to the informal procedure.
Sobier, T.C.C.J. (orally):—The Court is now prepared to give reasons for judgment in Lake Superior Investments Ltd. versus the Minister of National Revenue, 90-74(IT).
Sobier, T.C.C.J.:—The appellant appeals from an assessment by the Minister of National Revenue (the" Minister”) for her 1985 taxation year with respect to matters set out in full below.
Brulé, T.C.C.J.:—These appeals result from assessments by the Minister of National Revenue ("respondent") in which the appellants were assessed on gains from the sales of real property as income whereas the appellants claimed the gains as being capital in
