Vallozzi v. R., 98 D.T.C. 1318, [1998] 2 C.T.C. 2142 -- text

Beaubier T.C.J.:

1 These appeals were heard together on common evidence by consent of the parties at Toronto, Ontario on November 17 and 18, 1997 pursuant to the General Procedure. The Appellants and their husbands testified on behalf of the Appellants. The Respondent called Lyle Faulkner, Tajinder Kooner and Donald Balanger, officers of Revenue Canada.

Ford Motor Co. of Canada v. Minister of National Revenue, [1997] 3 C.T.C. 80 -- text

Linden J.A.& McDonald J.A.:

1 The issue in this appeal is whether Ford Motor Company of Canada, Limited (“Ford Canada”) ought to have been included in the expanded definition of “manufacturer or producer” in paragraph 2(1)(f) of the Excise Tax Act[FN1: <p>R.S.C. 1970, c. E-13 (as amended)</p>] (the “Act”) for the purposes of determining the tax payable on its imported vehicles. Paragraph 2(1)(f) provided:

2.(1) In this Act

McCaig v. R., [1998] 2 C.T.C. 2270 -- text

Rowe J. (orally):

1 The appeals are with respect to the 778appellant's 1991, 1992 and 1993 taxation years. In computing income for the 1992 taxation year, the appellant claimed a deduction for moving expenses of $15,225.00. In computing income for each of the 1991, 1992 and 1993 taxation years, the appellant deducted rental losses arising from rental of a part of her principal residence.

Pages

Subscribe to Tax Interpretations RSS