Éthier v. R., [1997] 3 C.T.C. 3116 -- text
Lamarre Proulx T.C.J.:
1 The appellant is appealing the assessment by the Minister of National Revenue (the “Minister”) for the 1992 taxation year, under the informal procedure.
Brumale v. R., [1997] 3 C.T.C. 2042 -- text
St. Onge T.C.J.:
1 The appeal of Giuseppe Brumale was heard at Montréal, Quebec, on July 30, 1996. The point for determination was whether the appellant incurred a business investment loss of $9,593 ($7,194 of which was deductible) during the 1991 taxation year.
2 The respondent disallowed the loss on the basis of the following facts:
[TRANSLATION]
Matthew v. Minister of National Revenue, [1997] 3 C.T.C. 2547, (sub nom. Matthew v. R.) 97 D.T.C. 1454 -- text
Rip T.C.J.:
Gernhart v. R., 98 D.T.C. 6026, [1998] 2 C.T.C. 102 -- text
Per curiam:
Tipster Investments Ltd. v. R., 98 D.T.C. 1504, [1998] 2 C.T.C. 3005 -- text
Sarchuk T.C.J.:
1 This is an appeal by Tipster Investments Ltd. (Tipster) from assessment no. 8649272 dated February 8, 1995.
Gaudet v. R., [1998] 2 C.T.C. 2562 -- text
Tremblay T.C.J.:
1 This appeal was heard under the informal procedure on January 9, 1996 at Québec, Quebec. The hearing was continued on November 6, 1996 after the appellant informed the Attorney General of Canada of his intention of invoking the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (the “Charter”).
Villeneuve v. R., 97 D.T.C. 5435, [1997] 3 C.T.C. 147 -- text
Denault J.A. (Desjardins, Décary, JJ.A., concurring):
1 The Appellant claims the Tax Court judge erred in concluding that the gain realized from the disposition of a property known as Les Terrasses Chavoin, in the taxation years 1989 and 1990, was income in nature and not capital.
2 We have not been persuaded that the Tax Court judge made any palpable or overriding error that would warrant our intervention.
ACTRA Fraternal Benefit Society v. R., 97 D.T.C. 5243, [1997] 3 C.T.C. 61 -- text
Robertson J.A.:
Allison v. R., 97 D.T.C. 5314, [1997] 3 C.T.C. 1 -- text
Marceau J.A.:
1 We are all of the view that the learned Tax Court Judge, on the basis of the evidence before him, did not make any error in coming to the conclusion he reached. The application for judicial review of that conclusion is without merit. The application is therefore dismissed.
Robitaille v. R., [1997] 3 C.T.C. 3031, 97 DTC 1286 -- text
Dussault T.C.J.:
1 These appeals were heard under the informal procedure. They are appeals from assessments for the appellant's 1991, 1992 and 1993 taxation years.
2 In assessing the appellant for those years the Minister of National Revenue (“the Minister”) disallowed the deduction of interest paid on money borrowed in 1985 and 1988, the repayment of which was secured in each case by a mortgage on his home.
Pages
