Grant, DJ:—This is an appeal from a decision of the Tax Appeal Board dated the 21st day of March, 1975 whereby such Board dismissed the appeal of the plaintiff from assessment to income tax for the appellant’s 1971 taxation year. By such assessment the

Le Dain, J:—This is an appeal from a judgment of the Trial Division delivered by Marceau, J dismissing an appeal against assessments under the Income Tax Act, RSC 1952, c 148, for the taxation years 1958,1959,1960, 1962,

Heald, J:—I agree with the conclusion of MacKay, DJ that the payment of $100,000 was for goodwill and that the appellant was entitled to treat it as capital and not as income. I also agree with his reasons for arriving at that conclusion.

Dubé, J:—This is an appeal of a decision of the Tax Review Board confirming an assessment of the Minister of National Revenue which included in the plaintiff’s income for his 1973 taxation year the sum of $77,812.50.

Cattanach, J:—This appeal from a decision of the Tax Review Board respecting the assessment of the appellant to income tax by the Minister of National Revenue for the 1972 taxation year is what is known in the vernacular as a “trading case”.

Cattanach, J:—For reasons similar to those expressed in the motion in Mike Dym and The Queen (Court File No T-64-77) the motion herein is likewise refused.

Cattanach, J:—This is an application to change the terms of a judgment granted by myself on May 18, 1979 following upon a motion under Rule 324 for judgment on consent dated May 7, 1979 signed by counsel for both parties. The motion recites

Heald, J:—We are all of the view that there are no significant distinctions between this case and the Snow case (Russell Snow v The Queen, [1979] CTC 227; 79 DTC 5177), where this Court held: Section 86 of the

Cattanach, J:—The plaintiff by its action herein seeks a declaration that a consumption tax exacted by the Department of National Revenue (presided over by the Minister of National Revenue and his lawful deputy, the Deputy Minister of National Revenue for

Mahoney, J:—The issue is the deductibility from its taxable income of certain life insurance premiums paid by the plaintiff in its 1974 and 1975 taxation years. The amounts in issue are $1,595 and $5,899.50 respectively. The policies insured the lives of