Hugessen, J.:—We are all of the view that the trial judge committed no manifest error that could be a basis for intervention by this Court when he held that the sum of $936,512 received by the respondent in 1974 was only an advance on

Reed, J.: —The issue in this case is a very narrow one: whether the “thin capitalization rules" apply to limit the amount of interest the plaintiff can claim as an expense as against its income for the 1978 taxation year.

Dubé, J.: —By this income tax appeal the plaintiff (at times referred to as "Speedy Muffler”) claims that its activities in assembling and installing exhaust systems on motor vehicles constituted an active business of manufacturing and processing goods for

Maher, J: —In these matters three applications are made for a determination as to whether the actions by The Minister of National Revenue (hereinafter referred to as "the Minister”), directing that the applicant taxpayers forthwith pay the amounts of

Cullen, J.:—This is an appeal by way of a statement of claim from a decision of the Tax Court of Canada dated January 5, 1986, which allowed in part the plaintiff's appeal from notices of reassessment issued by the Minister of National

Collier, J. [Orally]:—This is an appeal from a decision of the Tax Court of Canada. The reasons of Judge Goetz are reported at [1985] 2 C.T.C. 2331; 85 D.T.C. 613. He allowed the defendant taxpayer's appeal.

Dubé, J.:—This application heard at Saskatoon, Saskatchewan on September 29, 1987, is for an order dismissing the plaintiff's actions (excepting the action concerning the 1975 and 1976 taxation years of the plaintiff John Miazga) as scandalous, frivolous and

Pratte, J.: —This is an appeal from a judgment of the trial division (Reed, J.) allowing with costs an appeal by the respondent from income tax reassessments of its 1974,1975 and 1976 taxation years.

Mahoney, J.:—The appellant commenced an action arising out of one or more disputes with the Department of National Revenue. Omitting the purely scurrilous, paragraph 1 identifies the plaintiff and paragraphs 2 and 3 allege that “false requests" were sent to

Quigley, J.:—This is an appeal by the Crown from the acquittal of the respondent on two counts alleging offences committed by him contrary to section 242 of the Income Tax Act (Canada), R.S.C. 1952, as amended. The wording