Heald, J.A.: This appeal was heard immediately after the Court dismissed with costs this respondent's appeal in file No. A-725-90 between the same parties. Appeal No. A-725-90 was an appeal from the decision of Cullen, J. wherein he allowed the appeal

Mahoney, J.A. [Marceau and MacGuigan, JJ.A concurring]:—This is an appeal from a reported decision of the Trial Division [1991] 1 C.T.C. 197; 91 D.T.C. 5085, which dismissed the appellant's appeal against its 1985 and 1986 income tax assessments imposing a

Dubé, J. [Translation]:—The question to be resolved in this tax case is whether the interest paid by the plaintiff in the 1983, 1984 and 1985 taxation years can be deducted from tax pursuant to the provisions of subparagraph 20(1)(c)(i) of the

Jerome, A.C.J.:—This is an action by way of appeal pursuant to sections 51.24 and 51.28 of the Excise Tax Act, R.S.C. 1970, c. E-13, as amended. The Attorney General of Canada (the "plaintiff") appeals a decision of the Tariff

Marceau, J.A.: — In spite of the very able argument of Mr. Greene, we have not been persuaded that the judgment of the Trial Division was ill-founded.

Joyal, J.: —In these proceedings relating to an income tax appeal, the plaintiff taxpayer seeks an order from this Court for the production by the defendant of certain confidential documents in its possession.

Boyd, J.:—This is an appeal of a decision of the Minister of Finance and Corporate Relations, disallowing the petitioner's appeal of an assessment made under the Corporation Capital Tax Act (“the Act”). The appeal is brought

Pinard, J.:—By her action the plaintiff is claiming from the defendant payment of the balance of sales tax, penalty and accumulated interest pursuant to the Excise Tax Act, R.S.C. 1970, c. E-13, as amended.

Jerome, A.CJ.:—This matter came on for hearing at Edmonton, Alberta on September 13, 1990. The executrix of the estate of Alexander Boger, deceased, (the "plaintiff") appeals a decision of the Tax Court of Canada dated November 3, 1988 which dismissed

Pratte, J.A.: — We are all of opinion that the findings of facts of the trial judge were amply supported by the evidence and that he correctly applied the law to those facts.