THORSON, P.:—Two separate proceedings were launched by the appellant herein. In the first it appealed against its excess profits tax assessments for the years 1948 and 1944 and in the second against its excess profits tax assessments for the years 1945, 1946

THE CHIEF Justice:—This appeal involves the ascertainment of the proper amount of excess profits for its 1947 taxation year of the respondent company Anaconda American Brass Ltd. pursuant to the Excess Profits Tax Act, 1940. By Section 2(1)

CAMERON, J.:—This is an appeal and a cross-appeal from a decision of the Income Tax Appeal Board dated August 19, 1952, which allowed in part an appeal by the appellant company in respect of its 1946 taxation year. On January 31, 1946, the close

Fournier, J.:—In this information the plaintiff, under Section 86(1) of the Excise Tax Act, R.S.C. 1927, ce. 179, as amended, claims from the defendant the sum of $37,064.66 for sales tax said to be payable in respect of the manufacture

THORSON, P.:—This is an appeal from the decision of the Income Tax Appeal Board (1954), 10 Tax A.B.C. 61, dated February 3, 1954, dismissing the appellant’s appeals from its income tax assessments for 1949 and 1950.

CAMERON, J.:—This is an appeal from a decision of the Income Tax Appeal Board dated April 28, 1953 (8 Tax A.B.C. 247), dismissing the appellant’s appeal from an assessment to income tax in respect of the appellant’s taxation year ending February 28, 1948.

THORSON, P.:—In the first of these causes the appellant appeals against the decision of the Income Tax Appeal Board (1953), 8 Tax A.B.C. 51, dated February 12, 1953, dismissing its appeal against its Income tax assessments for its 1947 and 1948 taxation

Le JUGE EN Chef:—Il s’agit d’un jugement de la Cour de l’Echiquier en vertu duquel la réclamation de l’appelante a été rejetée sans frais. Cette réclamation était pour une somme de $20,187.47, dont l’appelante voulait tenir l’intimé responsable en vertu de la

THORSON, P.:—The information exhibited herein shows that the defendant has over a period of years manufactured and sold certain articles known as friction disc sharpeners and that the plaintiff claims sales tax and penalties in the sum of $1,165.77 on the sales

RAND, J. (The Chief Justice concurs) :—This reference raises an important question of the right of the Minister of National Revenue to object to the production before a court of the income returns of a person charged in criminal. proceedings ; and since