Sarchuk T.C.J.:

1 This is an appeal by Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce (the Appellant from an assessment for income tax with respect to its 1977 taxation year, wherein the Minister of National Revenue (the Minister) disallowed certain deductions claimed by it pursuant to former paragraph 20(1)(gg) of the Income Tax Act (the Act).

Bonner T.C.J.:

1 This is an appeal from an assessment of income tax for the 1990 taxation year. The issue is whether the Appellant suffered a non-capital loss of $65,895.00 in the year. The loss is said to have resulted from the write down to market value of the inventory of a business, that inventory consisting of 9,000 shares of Trilon Financial Corp.

Bell T.C.J.:

1 The taxation years under appeal are 1987, 1988 and 1989.

Issues:

• 1. Whether, under subsection 15(1) of the of the Income Tax Act (the “Act”), a benefit was conferred by Billvest Ltd. (“Billvest”) on its sole shareholder, the Appellant, in the total amount of $1,039,243,

McArthur T.C.J.:

1 These appeals are under the informal procedure concerning the Appellant's 1991, 1992 and 1993 taxation years. They involve the disallowance of expenses from a gravel mining operation and the rental of farm land for hay harvesting.

Bowman T.C.J.:

1 These appeals are from loss determinations made under the Income Tax Act for the 1981, 1982 and 1983 taxation years. The narrow question is whether the cost of “acquiring” zoning from a landowner across the street that would permit a greater density is a cost of land or building or, if neither, whether it is an eligible capital expenditure.

Tremblay T.C.J.:

1 This appeal was heard under the informal procedure on April 29, 1997 at Montréal, Quebec.

1. Point at issue

2 According to the Notice of Appeal and the Reply to the Notice of Appeal, the question is whether the appellant is entitled to claim a non-refundable equivalent-to-married tax credit of $914.60 ($5,380 × 17%) for a wholly dependent person, his daughter Nadia.

Teskey T.C.J.:

1 The Appellants herein appeal their assessment of income tax for the year 1991. Both Appellants elected the informal procedure and both appeals were heard on common evidence.

Sarchuk T.C.J.:

1 This is an appeal by Eric John (the Appellant) from an assessment of tax with respect to his 1994 taxation year. At issue is the proper application of subsection 118(2) of the Income Tax Act (the Act).

Robertson J.A.:

Lamarre Proulx T.C.J.:

1 These are appeals, heard under the informal procedure, from reassessments made using the net worth method for 1989, 1990 and 1991.

2 The issues concern the accuracy of the calculation of the net worth difference and the imposition of penalties pursuant to s. 163(2) of the Income Tax Act (“the Act”) for each of the years on appeal.