Collier, J:—The present action involves an income tax reassessment of the plaintiff made by the Minister of National Revenue in April 1979 for taxation years 1974, 1975 and 1976.

Cullen, J:—With respect to the facts of this case there is little if any disagreement. What is in dispute is the interpretation to be given to the actions taken.

Ludwig, Prov Ct J:— The accused Robert Marcoux and Cecile Marcoux were charged as follows:

Count #1

The Associate Chief Justice:—This action is by way of appeal from the decision of the Tax Review Board, pronounced by The Hon Lucien Cardin, Chairman. At issue is the taxation of sums of money received by the defendant in the 1975,

Collier, J:—This is an appeal from a decision of the Tax Review Board. The presiding member upheld assessments by the Minister for the plaintiff's 1970-74 taxation years, inclusive.

Hartt, J:—This is an application by the defence under subsection 24(2) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms for an order excluding the introduction into evidence in these proceedings of any materials seized

Mahoney, J:—This is an appeal by leave pursuant to section 60 of the Excise Tax Act, RSC 1970, c E-13, from a decision of the Tariff Board which held that bone dust removers used by Loblaws Limited in its retail butchering

Stone, J:—This appeal is brought against a judgment of the Trial Division which held that the respondent was entitled to deduct from income certain payments made by him in the years 1976 and 1977 to the Ottawa Christian School Association, The

Reed, J:—This is an appeal from a decision of the Tax Review Board allowing the defendant taxpayer, Boehringer Ingelheim (Canada) Ltd, to deduct the inventory allowance, provided for by paragraph 20(1)(gg) of the Income Tax Act, SC

Hugessen, J:—This is a section 28 application against a decision of St Onge, TCJ by which he refused to grant the applicant relief against failure to object to a reassessment within the 90-day period provided by section 165 of the Income