A J Frost:

1 This is an income tax appeal in respect of the appellant's 1972 taxation year.

2 The appeal was set down for hearing on April 18, 1975, and subsequently adjourned pending the filing of written submissions on the understanding that the Board would then render its decision based on the information contained in the said submissions.

Addy, J:

1 The defendant, a duly licensed wholesaler within the meaning of the Excise Tax Act, RSC 1952, c 100, purchased in November and December 1967, as it had in the past, its inventory of steel from a Canadian importer. The amount paid for the steel to the Canadian supplier included $14.60 per metric ton for ocean freight charges. The transportation costs were shown as a separate item on the invoices of the defendant's supplier.

Heald, J:

A J Frost (orally: June 3, 1975):

1 I shall now give my decision in respect of the 1970 and 1971 taxation years.

2 The question at issue is whether or not the amounts claimed as business deductions in respect of payments made under an agreement executed in March of 1968 relating to the purchase of the law practice of one A J McNab were of a capital or a revenue nature.

Thurlow, J:

1 This is an application under section 67 of the Supreme Court Act for an order settling the contents of the case on appeal, the parties having failed to reach an agreement thereon.

Addy, J:

Hamlyn T.C.J.:

1 This is in the matter of Brad Corcoran and Her Majesty The Queen, and are appeals with respect to the 1992, 1993 and 1994 taxation years.

2 In computing his income for the 1992, 1993 and 1994 taxation years, the Appellant deducted the amounts of $10,560.00, $12,737.00 and $5,961.29, respectively, as business losses.

A W Prociuk (orally: March 20, 1975):

Thurlow, J (per curiam):

1 The facts in this case are similar in all material respects to those in the case of Price (Nfld) Pulp & Paper Limited v. Her Majesty the Queen. They differ in immaterial details one of which is that the sale in this case was completed before the petition of right was brought. At the hearing of the appeal counsel stated that the same submissions were applicable and asked that they be treated as having been made in this case as well.

Collier, J:

1 The Minister of National Revenue assessed the plaintiff's income tax for the year 1969 on a total amount of $40,000 received by him, a non-resident, in that year from a Canadian company. The plaintiff's position is that the moneys received were a “pension” within Article VIA of the Canada-US Tax Convention, and therefore exempt from taxation in Canada. The Tax Review Board confirmed the Minister's assessment. This appeal followed.