Gibson, J.:—This is an appeal from the decision of the Tax Appeal Board dated September 24, 1963 in respect of assessments for income tax made against the appellant in the sum of $1,753,200.07 being respectively a tax in the sum of $171,271.01 levied

DUMOULIN, J.:—At the start of trial, the parties hereto moved that appeal number 145-751 of this Court’s records, between The Minister of National Revenue, appellant, and Allan Bronfman, respondent, serve mutatis mutandis as a pattern decision for the instant cases, both as to the facts and the pertinent law.

DUMOULIN, J.:—The case about to be decided was chosen, at the request of the litigants, as a test applicable in law and in facts to four other similar suits, respectively directed against three brothers and a brother-in-law of the respondent. The amounts in each of the five actions represent one-fifth of the aggregate corporate gifts made by a certain company to third parties, during the 1950-1955 period, divided in five parts imposed as taxable income on each of its directors equally.

CATTANACH, J.:—This is an appeal from an assessment under the Income Tax Act, R.S.C. 1952, c. 148 of Consolidated Building Corporation Limited for its taxation year ending February 28, 1961.

EL, J.:—This is an appeal from a decision of the Tax Appeal Board (34 Tax A.B.C. 26) dated October 30, 1963, dismissing the appellant’s appeal from its income tax assessments whereby amounts of $6,400 for each of the years 1955, 1956 and 1957 and $6,933.37 for the year 1958, which had been deducted by the taxpayer as capital cost allowances in respect of the cost of a lease, were added to its income.

CATTANACH, J.:—This is an appeal from assessment to income tax levied by the Minister on the appellant for the 1961 taxation year.

The appellant began his working life as a construction worker specializing, at first, as a tile setter, but subsequently engaged in the building of single family dwellings in and about the City of Toronto. While the appellant could and did build the odd home pursuant to contract, nevertheless the greater number of homes which were built by him were built on a speculative basis, that is with no specific purchaser in view.

Noël, J.:— This is an appeal from the decision of the Income Tax Appeal Board, 34 Tax A.B.C. 182, dated December 16, 1963, dismissing the appellant’s appeals from its income tax assessments for 1960 and 1961 whereby amounts of $12,274.36 and $21,041.66

KEARNEY, J.:—This is an appeal from a decision of the Tax Appeal Board (31 Tax A.B.C. 341) of March 11, 1963, which dismissed the appellant’s appeal from a re-assessment made by the Minister on April 21, 1961, whereby a sum of $142,583.22 was added

CATTANACH, J.:—This is an appeal from a judgment of the Tax Appeal Board dated November 20, 1964 (87 Tax A.B.C. 86) whereby an appeal from an assessment to income tax for the appellant’s 1962 taxation year was dismissed.

GIBSON, J.:—I am of the opinion that this case can be decided on the question of fact raised in the action. The question of fact, in brief, is whether the respondent, Egidio Pevato, was engaged in the same business at all material times within the