Décary, J:—Le demandeur ayant admis dans son désistement partiel qu’un montant de $17,000 avait été proprement ajouté à son revenu pour l’année d’imposition 1971; la défenderesse ayant reconnu qu’un montant de $1,500 pour l’année d’imposition 1971, et de $3,600

Addy, J:—Il s’agit en l’occurrence de déterminer si le montant de $4,160.83 réclamé par le demandeur en déduction du revenu pour l’année d’imposition 1975, a titre de pension alimentaire pour son épouse, rencontre les exigences de l’article 60 de la

Urie, J:—This is an appeal from a Judgment of the Trial Division wherein the respondent’s appeal from a decision of the Tax Review Board was allowed. As a result, the respondent’s assessment for tax of the appellant’s income for the 1973 taxation

Walsh, J:—This case concerns an appeal by plaintiff and a cross appeal by defendant from the decision of the Tax Review Board dated September 29, 1977, which found in favour of the defendant on one of the two issues raised and in favour

Grant, DJ:—In these three actions the plaintiff appeals from the reassessment of its income for each of the years 1969,1970 and 1971, made by the Minister pursuant to the provisions of the Income Tax Act. It is incorporated

Walsh, J:—This is an appeal from a judgment dated October 7, 1977, of the Tax Review Board allowing in part defendant’s appeal against a reassessment made by the Minister of National Revenue which included a stand-by charge of $486 in the

MacDonald, J:—This action has proceeded to trial upon an agreed statement of facts and the Court is asked this question: Is Lillian Brown properly liable for $4.38, or part thereof, social services tax in respect of the electricity purchased from British

Mahoney, J:—The plaintiff appeals income tax assessments for its taxation years ended December 31 in each of the years 1968 to 1975, both inclusive. By order made July 4, 1978, this and seven other actions against the defendant are test actions.