CAMERON, J.: This is an appeal in respect to the assessment under the Excess Profits Tax Act for the taxation year 1942. On June 24th, 1943, the appellant filed his income tax return, including his return under the Excess
KERWIN, J.: The executors of the will of the Honourable Patrick Burns and other parties added in the Exchequer Court appeal from a judgment of that Court (ante, p. 13) dismissing an appeal from the decision of the Minister of National Revenue
Rand, J.: The contention of the appellant is that in 1925 when it became known that the telegraph system leased in 1878 had in large measure lost its identity through changes in location and absorption in a larger system, an agreement was made by which
Viscount Simon :—This is an appeal by special leave from a judgment of the Supreme Court of Canada dated February 11th, 1946, which allowed the appeal of the present respondent from a judgment of the Exchequer Court of Canada, dated May 25th, 1945,
THORSON, P.:—These appeals are from assessments under the Income War Tax Act, R.S.C. 1927, e. 97, and the Excess Profits Tax Act, 1940 (Dom.) c. 32, in respect of the appellant’s taxation years ending
ANGERS, J.:—This is an appeal under sections 58 and following of the Income War Tax Act, 1917, and amendments thereto, from the assessment of the appellant, dated September 19, 1942, whereby a tax in the sum of $312.11 was levied in respect of
RINFRET, C.J.C.:—The appellant was, in 1941, a Member of the Legislature of the Province of Alberta representing the constituency of Calgary.
HUDSON J.:—The City of Winnipeg owns land lying within the territorial boundaries of the appellant municipality, as defined by the Municipal Boundaries Act, R.S.M. 1940, c. 143. The question for decision in this appeal is the validity of tax
RAND, J. (concurred in by KELLOCK, J.) : The respondent was incorporated in 1897 under the Companies Act (Imperial), 1862- 1893, and was registered as an extra-provincial company under the British Columbia Companies Act of 1897 on
RINFRET, C.J.C.:—The Appeal Case states the present litigation as follows:
