Pratte J.A.:—This appeal raises the question of whether an agreement concluded between the partners of the partnership Desjardins et Sauriol met the requirements of subsection 96(1.1) of the Income Tax Act, R.S.C. 1952, c. 148 (am.
Wong J (orally):—The four of you have been found guilty by a jury of perpetrating five counts of income tax fraud on the Federal Government amounting to almost 17 and a half million dollars arising out of two purported scientific research projects
Jerome A.C.J.:—This is an appeal by the plaintiffs from a decision of the Tax Court of Canada dated July 19, 1990, dismissing their appeal from a reassessment by the Minister of National Revenue for the 1984 taxation year. At the hearing of
Pinard J.:—The plaintiff's action constitutes an appeal from the decision of the Tax Court of Canada dated September 7, 1984, substantially dismissing his appeal from the assessments made by the Minister of National Revenue in determining his taxable income for the 1974, 1975, 1976, 1977 and 1978 taxation years. The defendant has, by counter-claim, appealed the portion of that judgment that removed certain sums from the statement of the plaintiff's net worth.
Noël J.:—This is an appeal from a decision of the Tax Court of Canada which allowed the defendant's appeal from the assessments issued by the Minister of Revenue for his 1987 and 1988 taxation years. The issue involved is the deductibility of
Simpson J.:—The plaintiffs McAllister Drilling Ltd. ("Drilling"), McAllister Holdings Ltd. ("Holdings") and McAllister Waterwells Ltd. ("Waterwells") appeal, pursuant to subsection 172(1) of the Income Tax Act, R.S.C. 1952, c. 148 (am. S.C. 1970-71-72,
Stone, J.A:—It is clear to the Court that the learned Tax Court of Canada Judge made no reviewable error in finding that the applicant’s income had been properly assessed for the taxation years 1982 to 1986 inclusive. However, it is conceded by
Muldoon J.:—The plaintiff, by amended statement of claim filed July 20, 1990, appeals from a judgment of the Tax Court of Canada pronounced on April 10, 1990 [[1990] 2 C.T.C. 2001, 90 D.T.C. 1401] wherein Cal-Gas’ appeal from its reassessments for
Mckeown J.:—The Associate Senior Prothonotary did not permit the appellant (defendant) to withdraw an admission in its amended defence. Furthermore, the Associate Senior Prothonotary did not strike out the part of the reply of the respondent (plaintiff).
Strayer J.:—This is an appeal from a decision of the Tax Court of Canada dated August 30, 1983 ([1983] C.T.C. 2596, 83 D.T.C. 539. While this appeal was, of course, in the form of a trial de novo the basic facts are not
