Bowie T.C.J.:

1 These two appeals are concerned with the application of the penal provisions found in subsections 163(2) and 110.6(6) of the Income Tax Act (the Act). They arise out of the failure of the taxpayers to disclose on their income tax returns for the year 1989 the very substantial gain which they each realized from the sale by them in January 1989 of a building at 1022 Danforth Avenue in the city of Toronto (the building).

Archambault T.C.J.:

Margeson T.C.J.:

1 The applicants, Richard C. Graham and William S. Hawkes applied to this Court for an Order that costs of trial be awarded to the applicants pursuant to Rule 147 of the Tax Court of Canada Rules and that

(a) special directions be issued to the Taxing Officer pursuant to Rule 147 to tax the costs on a solicitor-client basis; or

Christie A.C.J.T.C.:

1 This appeal is governed by the Informal Procedure provided for under section 18 and following sections of the Tax Court of Canada Act. The year under review is 1994.

2 The Notice of Appeal reads:

In response to the Notification of confirmation by the Minister, I wish to file a Notice of Appeal by means of an Informal Procedure to the Tax Court of Canada.

McArthur T.C.J.:

1 This appeal, under the informal procedure, concerns the Appellant's 1992 taxation year. The primary issue is whether a mortgage interest subsidy payment is taxable under paragraph 6(1)(a) of the Income Tax Act (the “Act”). A secondary issue is whether a $3,101 cost of living reimbursement is taxable.

Hugessen J.A.:

1 This is an application for judicial review of a decision of the Tax Court of Canada reported at[1996] 2 C.T.C. 2631which allowed the taxpayer's appeal of a reassessment by the Minister claiming an amount allegedly refunded in excess of what the taxpayer was entitled to.

Watson D.J.T.C.:

1 These appeals dealing with the Appellant's 1994 and 1995 taxation years were heard on common evidence with consent of the parties under the Informal Procedure in Belleville, Ontario, on June 5, 1997.

Campbell J.:

Let the attached transcript of my Reasons for Judgment delivered orally from the bench at Winnipeg, Manitoba, on October 1, 1997, now edited, be filed to comply with section 51 of the Federal Court Act.

Mogan T.C.J.:

Mogan T.C.J.:

1 The Appellant was temporarily disabled as a result of an automobile accident. The issue in this appeal is whether a certain amount paid by an insurance company with respect to the Appellant's temporary disability is to be included in the computation of her income.