Taylor, T.C.J.:—These are appeals heard on common evidence in Calgary, Alberta, on December 3, 1990, against income tax assessments in which the Minister of National Revenue rejected the claims that certain real properties were inventory" of the appellants, and

Christie, A.C.j.T.C.:—The appellant appeals from reassessments of his liability to income tax respecting his 1985 and 1986 taxation years. The notice of appeal regarding 1985 is dated October 19, 1989. Paragraphs 24 and 25 thereof read:

Tremblay, T.C.J. [Translation]:—This case was heard in the city of Sherbrooke, Québec.

Kempo, T.C.J.:—This appeal is from the respondent's assessment dated May 29, 1987 which was made pursuant to subsection 160(1) of the Income Tax Act, R.S.C. 1952, c. 148 (am. S.C. 1970-71-72, c. 63) (the"Act").

Sarchuk, T.C.J. [Orally] I am not going to reserve on this. Ms. Lloyd does not seem particularly surprised. You have heard my earlier comments. They reflect my perception of the evidence as I have heard it.

Mogan, T.C.J.:—The issue in this appeal is whether the appellant, in her special circumstances, is entitled to the child tax credit for 1988. The respond ent admitted all of the facts alleged in the notice of appeal and the parties filed with

Margeson, T.C.J. [Orally]This is an appeal by the taxpayer, a doctor, from the assessment of the Minister of National Revenue dated August 23, 1988, for instalment interest in the amount of $2,770. The facts disclose, according to the appellant, that in the years

Margeson, T.C.J. [Orally]:—It was agreed at the outset by the parties that the facts as set out in the pleadings would be accepted by both parties as the facts in the case, and the case proceeded on the basis of an argument on the interpretation of

Tremblay, T.CJ. [Translation]:—These two appeals were heard on common evidence in the city of Sherbrooke, Québec.