Décary, J:—This is an appeal from an assessment of income tax for the year 1970. In its fiscal period which ended on June 30, 1970 the plaintiff realized an amount of $6,805 on the grant of an easement for a pipe line over its

Mahoney, J:—The issue is the meaning of the phrase “all reasonable and proper costs’’ as used in subsection 178(2) of the Income Tax Act.* [1] A secondary issue is whether this action was properly classified as

Bastin, DJ:—This action is an appeal from the decision of the Tax Review Board delivered February 24, 1976, dismissing the claim by the Minister to assess in the 1970 income tax year as taxable income a gain made by the taxpayer of $33,408

Urie, J:—This is an appeal from a judgment of the Trial Division dismissing with costs the appeal of the appellant from a decision of the Tax Review Board, wherein the learned trial judge dismissed the appellant’s appeal from a reassessment for

Marceau, J:—Appellant is appealing the decision of the Tax Review Board (on gifts} upholding the Minister’s assessment dated August 31, 1971, which required that he pay tax of $17,530 on gifts which he allegedly made during the 1969 taxation year, when

Mahoney, J:—The issue is whether the plaintiff acquired 142,998 common shares of Stanley Drug Products Limited with the intention of disposing of them at a profit. It acquired them at a price of $1,121/2 each in a transaction that closed April 2,

The Assistant Chairman:—The appellant’s appeal to this Board from an assessment for income tax for the 1973 taxation year proceeded before this Board on a statement of agreed facts. The relevant portions of the statement, excluding the “Agreement’ referred