Brulé, J.T.C.C.:—This appeal was brought under the informal procedure of the Tax Court of Canada Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. T-2. It concerns the appellant’s 1989 taxation year. She did not include in her income for that year the

Rowse, D.J.T.C.C.:—The appellant appeals from a reassessment of income tax for the 1985 taxation year. The respondent determined that the appellant's Cumulative Canadian Exploration Expense (C.E.E.) was $151,250 and not $302,500, as Claimed by the appellant.

Kempo, J.T.C.C. (orally):—These informal procedure appeals of Ravi Sakhuja and Debbie Sakhuja were, on consent application, joined for hearing on common evidence. The taxation years under appeal, 1986, 1987 and 1988 were identical to both appellants as were

Kempo, J.T.C.C.:—This informal procedure appeal concerns the appellant’s 1990 taxation year which arose from the disallowance by the respondent acting through the Minister of National Revenue (the "Minister") of his claim for a residence deduction pursuant to paragraph

Taylor, J.T.C.C. (orally):—I think that's the summary of it as far as Mr. Afsharian is concerned and I take your point with regard to the paucity of information quite seriously, Mr. Bundgard, and quite frankly I’d like you to summarize very briefly

Mogan J.T.C.C. (orally):—This is an appeal in respect of the 1989 and 1990 taxation years. There are two issues before the Court. The first issue is whether a certain amount received by the appellant with respect to the last payroll period for

Lamarre Proulx, J.T.C.C.:—The question at issue concerns the deductibility of legal costs in the computation of the income of the appellant for the 1987 and 1988 taxation years.

Lamarre Proulx, T.C.C.J.:—The appellant instituted an appeal from a reassessment of the Minister of National Revenue (the "Minister") for the 1988 taxation year.

Couture, C.J.T.C.C.:—This appeal heard under the rules of the informal procedure concerns the 1991 taxation year of the appellant. The latter acted for herself.