Bowman T.C.J.:

1 These appeals are from assessments for the 1993 and 1994 taxation years. They involve a narrow question of law concerning the effect on a provision of the Income Tax Act of a deeming provision in a provincial statute.

Bowman T.C.J.:

1 These appeals are from assessments for the 1994 and 1995 taxation years whereby the Minister of National Revenue denied the appellant's claim for a disability tax credit under section 118.3 of the Income Tax Act.

2 The question is whether in those years he had a severe and prolonged physical impairment, the effects of which were such that his ability to perform a basic activity of daily living was markedly restricted.

Marceau J.A.:

1 I have had the advantage of reading the reasons for judgment of Mr. Justice McDonald.

McArthur T.C.J.:

Bowman T.C.J.:

1 This appeal is from an assessment for the appellant's 1992 taxation year. It concerns a claim by him to deduct moving expenses under section 62 of the Income Tax Act.

Bowman T.C.J. (Orally):

1 This is an appeal from assessments made in 1994 and 1995, and it is made under the Income Tax Act for the 1994 and 1995 taxation year. The facts are quite straightforward. Mr. Brilla is a resident of Canada. He lives in Niagara Falls, but he works in Buffalo where he receives a salary from a United States company.

Sobier T.C.J.:

1 These appeals were heard on common evidence under the Informal Procedure of this Court.

Lamarre Proulx T.C.J.:

1 This is an appeal from an assessment made under section 227(10) of the Income Tax Act (the “Act”) for an amount payable by the appellant under section 227.1 of the Act. On March 2, 1994, the Minister of National Revenue (the “Minister”) made an assessment against the appellant, in his quality as director of the corporation, Les Services Alimentaires Le Banquetier Inc. (the “corporation”), in the amount of $65,319.29.

Jerome A.C.J.:

1 This appeal of the Notice of Confirmation of Assessment of the plaintiff's income tax return for the 1982 taxation year mailed on August 28, 1987 came on for hearing before me at Toronto, Ontario, on November 4, 1997. At the close of oral argument, I took the matter under reserve.

Lamarre Proulx T.C.J.:

1 These two appeals were heard on common evidence. The point at issue for 1993 is whether automobile expenses were incurred for the purpose of transporting maintenance and repair materials to a rental property and, for 1994, whether the documents filed as evidence of maintenance and repair expenses for that same property are acceptable as vouchers for those expenses.