Toronto College Park Ltd. v. The Queen, 94 DTC 6172, [1994] 1 CTC 194 (FCTD) -- text
Simpson, J.:—
Simpson, J.:—
McGillis, J. (orally):—The defendant Attorney General of Canada has applied for summary judgment in this matter under Rule 341 of the Federal Court Rules on the basis that the action raises no genuine issue to be tried.
Isaac, C.J.:—This is an appeal from a judgment of the Trial Division, rendered on September 17, 1987, which allowed the respondent's appeal from a decision of the Tax Court of Canada. By that decision, the Tax Court had allowed the appellant's
McArthur, J.T.C.C.:—Harry Wynberg Jr., Peter Wynberg, and Gerard F. Wynberg, the appellants, appeal under the informal procedure, the respondent's reassessments of their 1988 and 1989 taxation years. The appeals were heard on common evidence.
The issues arise from the value placed on a property sold and transferred by the appellants to Wynberg Landscaping Ltd. on September 19, 1989.
Heald, J.A. (McDonald, J.A., concurring):—This is an appeal from a judgment of the Trial Division wherein the appeal of the respondent from the reassessments by the Minister of National Revenue in respect of the respondent's 1987, 1988 and
Ratushny, J.:— The accused is charged under the Income Tax Act, R.S.C. 1952, c. 148 (am. S.C. 1970-71-72, c. 63) (the "Act") with 54 counts of income tax evasion in connection with certain of his clients. The accused is
Mahoney, J.A.:— The applicant's attack on the income tax assessment in issue is, in fact, a challenge to the constitutional validity of subsection 180.2(1) of the Income Tax Act, R.S.C. 1952, c. 148 (am. S.C. 1970-71-72, c. 63) (the "Act")
Matheson, J.:—This is an application on behalf of the Attorney General of Canada (the "applicant") for a declaration that it has priority over the Prince Edward Island Development Agency ("PEIDA") and the Inspector of Labour Standards ("Inspector") with respect
Hugessen J.A.:—This is an appeal from a decision of the Minister refusing the appellant's application to register as a charity under the Income Tax Act, R.S.C. 1952, c. 148 (am. S.C. 1970-71-72, c. 63) (the "Act"). In the correspondence
Wetmore, J.:—
The facts: