Simpson J.:-This case concerns the deductibility of an air conditioner as a medical expense. To qualify for the deduction under the Income Tax Act, R.S.C. 1952, c. 148 (am. S.C. 1970- 71-72, c. 63) (the ’’Act”), the air conditioner

Dubé J.:-This application is for an order quashing a demand issued by the Minister of National Revenue (the "Minister") pursuant to section 231.2 of the Income Tax Act, R.S.C. 1952, c. 148 (am. S.C. 1970-71-72, c. 63) (the "Act")

Isaac C.J.:-We are all of the view that there was evidence to support the finding of the learned trial judge that the appellant did not make a reasonable attempt to correctly determine its capital surplus on hand as required by subsection 184(3.1) of

Hugessen J.A. (DéCary and McDonald, JJ.A., concurring:—We are all of the view that this appeal from a judgment of Reed J. dismissing an appeal from a decision of the Senior Prothonotary striking out the statement of claim

Stone J.A.:-The issue in this appeal involves the construction of certain provisions of the Income Tax Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. 1 (5th Supp.) (the "Act"), and is concerned with whether the learned motions judge erred in upholding a

Pinard J.:—This is an appeal from an order of the prothonotary, dated November 23, 1994, which dismissed Howard D. Milne’s motion for a stay of execution proceedings.

The grounds of the appeal are:

Strayer J.A. (Décary, McDonald, JJ.A.):—

Giles A.S.P.:-The proceeding in which the motion before me is brought, arises because of an inquiry under section 231.4 of the Income Tax Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. 1 (5th Supp.) (the "Act”), and seeks declarations that sections 231.4 and 5

LéTourneau J.A. (McGuigan and Robertson, JJ.A., :-Despite the forceful arguments of Mr. Adler who represented himself, we are of the view that the Tax Court judge committed no error of law in coming to the conclusion that the

Robertson J.A.:-This is an appeal from a decision of the Trial Division, [1992] 2 C.T.C. 214, 92 D.T.C. 6572 (F.C.T.D.), allowing an appeal by trial de novo from a decision of the Tax Court of Canada, [1989] 2 C.T.C. 2171, 89