Teskey, T.C.J.:—The appellant appeals from its reassessments for the taxation years 1983, 1984 and 1985, wherein the Minister disallowed the deduction of commission payments as an ongoing expense on the basis that the amounts were capital outlays within the meaning of

Sobier, T.C.J.:—The appellant appeals reassessments made by the Minister of National Revenue (the" Minister") with respect to the appellant's 1980 to 1985 inclusive taxation years whereby the Minister disallowed as a deduction for those years of interest paid in

Sobier, T.C.J.:—The appellant appeals the reassessment by the Minister of National Revenue (the"Minister") of his 1983 and 1984 taxation years whereby the Minister

Beaubier, T.C J.:—This case was heard in Calgary, Alberta, on November 21, 1990.

Lamarre Proulx, T.C.J.:—The appellant is appealing the respondent's reassessments for its 1979, 1980 and 1983 taxation years.

Garon, T.C.J.:—Les appels des quatre appelants turent entendus sur preuve commune. Trois des appelants étaient représentés par avocat, le quatrième, Pierre Daneau, agissait pour son compte.

Goetz, T.C.J.:—The Minister of National Revenue reassessed the appellant's 1984 and 1985 taxation years and included the amounts of $27,574 in 1984 and $32,160 in 1985 in computing the appellant's total income for those years. It is from this reassessment that

Teskey, T.C.J.:—The appellant appeals from assessment number 551029, dated November 30, 1987, made pursuant to subsection 227(10) of the Income Tax Act, R.S.C. 1952, c. 148 (am. S.C. 1970-71-72, c. 63) (the "Act"), being the amount of unpaid deductions,

Taylor, T.C.J.:—These are appeals heard on common evidence on July 31, 1990, in Charlottetown, Prince Edward Island, against assessments dated October 28, 1988, under subsection 227(10) of the Income Tax Act, R.S.C. 1952, c. 148 (am.

Mogan, T.C.J.:—At the commencement of the hearing, counsel agreed that the appeals of Clarence Charkowy (88-2114), Dan Charkowy (88-2115) and Kenneth Charkowy (88-2116) would be heard together on common evidence. The three appellants were the only directors of