Mahoney, J:—The facts are agreed. Robin Ellis Agnew died in 1973. The plaintiff filed an income tax return for that portion of the year he had lived and reported therein gains on deemed disposition of capital property as required by paragraph

A J Frost (orally: March 7, 1975):

1 I shall now give my decision in this appeal in respect of the appellant's 1970 and 1971 taxation years.

2 At the opening of the hearing, counsel for the respondent applied for an order quashing the appellant's notice of appeal with respect to the assessment of tax made for the appellant's 1970 taxation year on the ground that no appeal lies from a “nil” assessment of income tax. The unopposed application was granted.

Collier, J:—The plaintiff sold, in 1970, two pieces of property, described at trial as Melville 2 and Melville 3, for $257,000. Melville 2 had been purchased by it in 1964 for $38,000; Melville 3 in 1967, for $100,000. The Minister of National

Heald, J:—In my reasons for judgment of November 1, 1974 I said at the conclusion thereof [[1974 CTC 783 at 791]:

Mahoney, J:—The issue is whether a death benefit under the Canada Pension Plan Act, RSC 1970, c C-5, is a death benefit as defined by the Income Tax Act, SC 1970-71-72, c 63. The former Act provides:

Marceau, J:—Plaintiff is appealing the decision of the Tax Review Board, refusing him the right to deduct in calculating his income for the years 1969, 1970 and 1971 certain ‘‘costs of canvassing and seeking new clients”, which he contends he was

Mahoney, J:—This issue is whether the defendant was entitled to claim capital cost allowance for 1968 in respect of certain real estate. The facts of the case are fully set forth in the decision of the Tax Review Board which allowed the

Fulton, J:—This is an appeal from a decision of the Minister under the Corporation Capital Tax Act, SBC 1973, c 24 (“the Act”). In his decision the Minister affirmed an assessment made by the Commissioner assessing additional

Collier, J:—The plaintiff claims, pursuant to section 222 and subsection 224(4) of the Income Tax Act,* [1] the sum of $7,324.54.

Martland, J (orally for the Court):—We are all of the opinion that this appeal fails. It is dismissed with costs.