The Associate Chief Justice:—This action pursuant to section 174 of the Income Tax Act (RSC 1952, c 148 and amendments thereto) appeals assessments for the 1976 and 1977 taxation years and came on for hearing at Ottawa, on

Heald, J:—This is an appeal from portions of an order made by the Trial Division on an interlocutory motion. The order under appeal provided, inter alia'.

The Associate Chief Justice:—This action is brought pursuant to subsection 177(2) of the Income Tax Act, RSC 1952, c 148 as amended, to appeal against the reassessment made by the Minister of National Revenue in respect to the plaintiffs 1979

Heald, J:—This is an application pursuant to subsection 44(7.3)* [1] of the Excise Tax Act and section 28 of the Federal Court Act to review and set aside the refusal by the Minister of

Reed, J:—This case puts in issue the validity of certain net worth assessments made by the defendant, of the plaintiff taxpayer’s income for the years 1973 to 1977.

Urie, J:—This appeal from a judgment of the Trial Division was heard together with an appeal from a similar judgment in The Queen v Frederick G Vivian, Appeal No 434-83 so that the reasons herein shall apply with

Stone, J:—This action, together with the action in Court No A-1001-82 were tried together on common evidence before Mahoney, J. In each action, separate assessments made under the Income Tax Act SC 1970-71-72, c 63, are attacked. The learned trial judge rendered separate judgments allowing the claim in each action.

Pratte, J [ORALLY]:—We do not need to hear you, Mr Gauthier.

Pratte, J:—This is an appeal from a judgment of the Trial Division quashing assessments made by the Minister of National Revenue pursuant to subsections 159(2) and (3) of the Income Tax Act. The special feature of this case is that

Urie, J:—The sole issue in this appeal from a judgment of the Trial Division is whether the sum of $6,072,595 received by the appellant in its 1974 taxation year and the sum of $725,221 received in its 1975 taxation year ought to have been