Macdonald v. R., [1997] 3 C.T.C. 2195 -- text

Taylor T.C.J.:

1 This is an appeal heard in Toronto, Ontario, on December 3, 1996, against income tax assessments for the years 1992 and 1993. The essential elements of the Notice of Appeal, and the Reply to the Notice of Appeal are as follows:

Notice of Appeal

Material Facts

1. In 1992 and 1993 the Appellant duly reported his income for the 1992 and 1993 taxation years.

Lauzon v. R., [1998] 2 C.T.C. 2529 -- text

Tardif T.C.J.:

1 The point at issue is whether the appellant was entitled to the child tax benefit for July and August 1993. The respondent claims that the benefit was payable to the child's father, relying in particular on sections 122.6 to 122.64 and subsection 248(1) of the Income Tax Act (the “Act”) and sections 6300, 6301 and 6302 of the Income Tax Regulations (the “Regulations”).

Romkey v. R., 97 DTC 719, [1997] 3 C.T.C. 2405 (TCC) -- text

McArthur T.C.J.:

1 These appeals were heard in Halifax on common evidence for the years 1988, 1989 and 1990. The Minister of National Revenue (the “Minister”) included in the Appellants' respective incomes, for each year, amounts paid to two trusts funds. The Appellants' sons were the sole beneficiaries of these trust funds. The money was advanced by way of dividends paid to the trusts by Brimar Developments Ltd. (Brimar) which was a corporation controlled by the Appellants.

MacDonell v. R., [1997] 3 C.T.C. 51, 97 D.T.C. 5293 -- text

Isaac C.J.:

1 This is an application for judicial review of a judgment of the Tax Court of Canada dated 17 May, 1996 dismissing the appellant's appeal from assessments made by the Minister of National Revenue under the Income Tax Act (“the Act”) for the years 1989 and 1990.

2 For the reasons that follow we are all of the view that the application cannot succeed.

Pages

Subscribe to Tax Interpretations RSS