Jerome, A.C.J.:—In this application the plaintiff seeks an order in the nature of certiorari quashing the decision of the Minister of National Revenue to issue two assessments and a reassessment of income tax against the plaintiff, on the

Strayer, J.:—

Joyal, J.:—This Court is seized of an appeal by the Crown from a judgment of the Tax Court of Canada vacating income tax reassessments issued to the defendant. Although proceedings in such respect are known as appeals, it is common ground that

Létourneau, J.A.:—After careful analysis of the decision and the submissions made by counsel, I am satisfied that the trial judge committed no error that warrants the intervention of this Court. Although there were some misstatements of fact by the trial

Teitelbaum, J.:—By means of an originating motion, the applicant, John Norman Gregory, a partner in the firm of Thorsteinssons, Barristers & Solicitors, requests:

Rouleau, J.:—This appeal, by way of trial de novo, is concerned with reassessments of income tax for the plaintiff's 1976 and 1977 taxation years. In filing his returns, the plaintiff computed his income on the basis that he was

Reed, J.:—This is an appeal by way of trial de novo from a decision of the Tax Court dated September 9, 1987. That decision upheld the Minister of National Revenue's assessment of the income tax payable by the plaintiff for

McGillis, J.:—The appellant Jocelyn Ghent Mallett appeals from a decision of the Tax Court of Canada dismissing her appeal concerning the deductibility of moving expenses claimed by her in the 1985 taxation year.

Hugessen, J.A.:—While it is trite law that a taxpayer may so arrange his business as to attract the least possible tax (see Duke of Westminster's case, [1936] A.C. 1), it is equally clear in our view that the reduction of his own tax

MacKay, J.:—In this action the plaintiff appeals from a decision of the Tax Court of Canada (United Equities Ltd. v. M.N.R., [1989] 2 C.T.C. 2171, 89 D.T.C. 391 (T.C.C.)), pursuant to section 172 of the Income