Holmes, DCJ:—This matter is concerned with two counts. In the first count, Charles Vernon Myers and Interpublishing Company Ltd, otherwise known as Inter Publishing Co Ltd were charged that they:
Walsh, J:—This action which seeks a declaratory judgment from the Court interpreting the collection proceedings which can be adopted by the Minister of National Revenue to enforce payment of taxes allegedly due following a notice of reassessment when the said
Addy, J:—The plaintiff is a member of and an owner of a 1/16th interest In a motion picture syndicate, known as the Heyman Syndicate (hereinafter referred to as “the Syndicate’’).
Walsh, J:—Plaintiff applies pursuant to subsection 167(4) of the Income Tax Act for an order extending the time within which an appeal may be instituted by her from a judgment of the Tax Review Board allowing in part her
Addy, J:—The present appeal is against a judgment of the Tax Review Board which allowed an appeal by the taxpayer company, Immobiliare Canada Ltd, a Canadian resident company, against an assessment made on July 19, 1973 relating to the 1966 taxation
Marceau, J:—The plaintiff, a public corporation, was assessed income tax for its 1969, 1970, 1971 and 1972 taxation years by notices of assessment, each of which was dated April 15, 1975.* [1] The assessments were objected to in
Walsh, J.:—This is a motion seeking an order to strike the mise en cause, Jacqueline Sicotte, from the case on the grounds that plaintiff illegally made her a party to it unnecessarily since no remedy is sought against her.
Collier, J:—At the end of the hearing of this action in Dawson Creek, BC on July 27, I dismissed the plaintiff’s appeal. I said written reasons would be given. They now follow.
Grant, DJ:—This is an appeal from the notice of confirmation by The Honourable Minister of Revenue dated April 2, 1976 confirming a reassessment of the plaintiff's income tax returns for the year 1973. At the conclusion of the evidence and argument
Collier, J:—This is an appeal by the taxpayer from a decision of the Tax Review Board. The grounds advanced in this Court are quite different from those put before the Board.
