Muldoon, J:—The plaintiff appeals from an adverse decision of the Tax Review Board, rendered orally on January 19, 1983, whereby it was adjudged that his acquisition in September, 1976 and sale in December 1977, of land and commercial premises in New

Estey, J (concurring):—I am in respectful agreement with the law as expressed in the judgment of La Forest J and the disposition there proposed. The fact that the giving of the evidence sought in this case may constitute a crime in another

Denault, J [TRANSLATION]:—The plaintiff is claiming from the defendant the sum of $4,384.42 representing the amount of the penalty that was imposed on it for having imported goods whose value was misrepresented, pursuant to the provisions of the Customs

Marceau, J:—This is an appeal from a decision of the Minister of National Revenue denying the appellant’s application to be registered as a “charity” pursuant to the Income Tax Act, RSC 1952, c 148 (as amended by SC 1970-71-72, c 63;

Pinard, J:—Il s’agit d’un appel en vertu de l’article 172(2) de la Loi de T impôt sur le revenu, Statuts de 1970-71-72, chap 63 et amendements, interjeté par le contribuable Andrew Yager à l’encontre d’avis de

Bonner, TCJ [ORALLY]:—The appellant appeals from assessments of income tax for the 1979 and 1980 taxation years. Those assessments were made on the basis that the 1979 profit realized on the sale of the Seagate Apartments was business income.

Tremblay, TCJ:—This appeal was heard in London, Ontario, on June 6, 1984.

Christie, CJTC:—This appeal relates to the appellant’s 1979 and 1980 taxation years. The issue is whether he is entitled to deduct from his total income in those years the restricted farming losses allowable under subsection 31(1) of the Income

Goetz, TCJ [ORALLY]:—This is an appeal with respect to the appellant’s 1975 taxation year. It was pointed out by the appellant that the issues to be determined are the capital cost allowance claims with respect to two films, “Flight of the Swan’’ and “Entre

Christie, CJTC:—The issue is whether the sum of $5,117.04 was part of the appellant’s income in his 1982 taxation year. There is no dispute about the facts. It is a test case which arose in this way. The appellant is a judge of the District Court