The Chairman [TRANSLATION]:—The appeal of Donat Thibault against a tax assessment in respect of the 1973 taxation year was heard in Montreal, Quebec on December 12, 1977.
Point at Issue
The point at issue in this appeal is the amount of a terminal loss of $4,298 claimed by the appellant on the sale of certain immovables, in- eluding five garages the undepreciated capital cost of which was $4,298, and which the appellant did not consider to have any value.
In the initial assessment dated August 25, 1975, the respondent established the value of the garages sold at $3,675, thereby reducing the terminal loss to $623. In the second assessment dated November 28, 1975, the market value of the garages was adjusted, and the respondent established the value at $2,000, allowing the appellant a deduction for a $2,298 terminal loss (Exhibits 1-2 and I-3).
Facts
The appellant was represented at the appeal hearing by his daughter, Miss Marguerite Thibault. On February 15, 1973 the appellant sold to the latter lots at 2629, 2631, 2633, 2637, 2639 and 2641 to 2647 Joliette Street in Montreal (Exhibit 1-1). These lots included five. garages which the appellant rented for the purpose of earning or producing income.
Submissions
Miss Thibault’s principal argument was that the value of the garages was nil because they abutted an embankment of about eight feet which, not being supported, properly, had caused certain garage walls to collapse, forcing the appellant to incur legal expenses in order to bring a suit for damages against the neighbour who owned the embankment (Exhibits A-1 and A-2). Miss Thibault argued that, as the garages were in a poor state of repair, they had no market value at the time of the Sale.
To support the market value of the garages as established in: its assessment, the respondent called Mr Pierre Ouellette, an appraiser working for the Department of National Revenue with thirty credits in real estate appraisal and related subjects from the University of Quebec.
In his appraisal report on the five garages involved in this appeal (Exhibit 1-4), Mr Ouellette used the appropriate real estate appraisal methods authorized by the Appraisal Institute of Canada. By also using the cost technique and that of the income from the five garages, and allowing for the damage mentioned by Miss Thibault, Mr Ouellette calculated the market value of the five garages to be between $4,569 and $3,708 and assigned them a value of $4,000.
In his appraisal report, Mr Ouellette also included photographs of the garages, of cement block construction, which gave the appellant a rental income of $600 per year. After examining the photographs and Mr Ouellette’s appraisal methods, I must conclude that an appraisal of $4,000 for the five garages appears reasonable to me. Moreover, the appellant has not proven to the Board’s satisfaction that the value of the garages was nil.
In assigning these buildings a market value of $2,000 the Minister did not err; on the contrary, in my opinion he was generous. Conclusion
For these reasons, the appeal is dismissed.
Appeal dismissed.