Pinard, J.: —In this action, pursuant to subsections 172(1) and 175(3) of the Income Tax Act, S.C. 1970-71-72, c. 63 as amended, the plaintiff is appealing from a decision of the Tax Court of Canada which dismissed her two appeals

Hugessen, J.A.:—Though the reasons given by the Tax Court of Canada judge in support of his refusal to exercise his discretion to extend the deadline are not beyond all criticism, we all consider that the result at which he arrived is the

The Associate Chief Justice:—The style of cause in this matter was amended by order of Giles, A.S.P. on September 11, 1989, unfortunately to reflect the fact that the plaintiff William J. Vine died on May 2, 1989 while judgment was

Jerome, A.C.J.: —I'm not going to call on you, Mrs. Goldstein.

I'm sorry, gentlemen, I can't allow the appeal.

Heald, J.A.: — In spite of the able and extensive argument by counsel for the appellant, we are not persuaded that the learned trial judge committed reviewable error, either in his appreciation of the factual situation in this case or in

Heald, J.A.: — We have not been persuaded that the learned trial judge has committed any error that would require the intervention of this Court.

Joyal, J.:—This is an action instituted by the plaintiff in 1977 and which finally came on for trial in Vancouver on October 3, 1989. It is an income tax matter relating to the taxation years 1970 and 1971. In each of those years, the

Jerome, A.C.J.:—This plaintiff's claim for the balance of a refund owing for sales taxes paid pursuant to subsection 27(1) of the Excise Tax Act, R.S.C. 1970, E-13, came on for hearing at Edmonton, Alberta on May 18, 1988. On