KEARNEY, J.:—We are here concerned with what can be regarded as two cases, which I will proceed to deal with in a single judgment, arising out of two separate sets of facts, the first of which occurred in the appellant’s taxation year 1958 and

SPENCE, J. (concurred in by the Chief Justice, Abbott, Ritchie, JJ.) :—This is an appeal by the Deputy Minister from the decision of Noël, J. in the Exchequer Court in which he found that an item known as a rock bolt” was covered by the exemption in Schedule III of the Excise Tax Act and, therefore, not liable for consumption or sales tax. For this purpose, it is sufficient to quote Schedule III as it appears in the reasons for judgment of the Tariff Board : :

‘‘PROCESSING MATERIALS

THURLOW J. These two appeals arise from the same transaction and, pursuant to an order of the Court made on the application of the Minister, they were heard together. By the same order it was. directed that the evidence adduced by the Minister and.

JACKETT, P. :—Il s’agit d’un appel, par le Ministre du revenu national, d’un jugement de la Commission d’appel de l’impôt, maintenant l’appel logé par l’intimé devant cette Commission, de la cotisation de l’intimé, en vertu de la Loi de l

KEARNEY, J.:—This is an appeal by the Minister from that part of a decision of the Tax Appeal Board dated January 9, 1963 (30 Tax A.B.C. 360), which allowed the respondent’s appeal from the income tax assessment dated February 16, 1960, for the

DUMOULIN, J.:—By their joint petition of right the suppliants are claiming from the respondent a refund in the sum of $59,235.62 for sales tax imposed by Section 30 of the Excise Tax Act, R.S.C. 1952, c. 100, and old age security tax,

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.