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

Hamlyn T.C.J.:

1 This is in the matter of Orjan Carlson and Her Majesty the Queen. From the Statement of Agreed Facts, I will read the following:

• 1. The Appellant is a Canadian resident who resides at 5254 Charnwood Crescent, Mississauga, Ontario, L5M 2J9.

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.

Tremblay T.C.J.:

1 This appeal was heard under the informal procedure at Trois-Rivières, Quebec, on April 9, 1997.

Bowman T.C.J.:

1 These appeals are from assessments made under the Income Tax Act for the appellant's 1986, 1987, 1988, 1989 and 1990 taxation years. In those years, the appellant claimed to set off against capital gains, net capital losses which he claims he sustained in 1982.

Garon T.C.J.:

1 These are appeals from income tax assessments for the 1991, 1992 and 1993 taxation years in the case of the Appellant Larry Chartrand and appeals from the income tax assessments for the taxation years 1992 and 1993 in the case of the Appellant Lorraine Chartrand. By the reassessments, the Minister of National Revenue disallowed rental losses claimed by both Appellants in the years in issue.

2 These appeals were heard on common evidence.

Dussault T.C.J.:

Marceau J.A.:

1 This appeal and cross-appeal arise from a ruling made by a Tax Court of Canada judge on a motion for an order requiring the Crown to produce documents for discovery in the course of the appellant's appeal proceedings against a reassessment by the Minister of National Revenue of its 1992 income tax liability.

Brulé T.C.J.:

1 The appellant, Multiview Inc. is appealing a reassessment of the Minister of National Revenue (the “Minister”) whereby the Minister disallowed the appellant's claim for the refundable Scientific Research & Experimental Development (“SR & ED”) credit in the amount of $505,830.00 in the 1994 taxation year.

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

1 The issue to be determined is whether this Court has jurisdiction to extend the time within which Nasha Properties Ltd. (“Nasha”) may serve on the Minister of National Revenue (“the Minister”) Notices of Objection to assessments of liability for income tax in respect of its 1987 and 1988 taxation years.