NOEL, J.:—This is an appeal against the appellant’s income tax assessments for the years 1955, 1956, 1957 and 1958. In his assessments, the respondent added to the appellant’s reported income for each of the above mentioned years the sums of $1,725, $33,878.30,

Noel, J.:—Continental Air Photo Ltd., the suppliant in this case, is a body corporate incorporated under The Companies Act of the Province of Alberta with head office in the City of Edmonton, Province of Alberta, where it carries on the

N OEL, J.:—This is an information in which the plaintiff claims from the defendant payment of the sum of $2,479.22 for sales tax in respect of sales of aerial photographs in the period December 1, 1959 to and including March 31, 1960, penalties for

KEARNEY, J.:—The present appeal is from a decision of the Tax Appeal Board dated April 6, 1961 (26 Tax A.B.C. 243), whereby a tax re-assessment made against the appellant by the respondent, which added, inter alia, $50,000 to the taxpayer’s

CATTANACH, J.:—This is an appeal against the income tax assessment of Twenty Spadina Road Limited, hereinafter called the Company, for the taxation year 1958 whereby the respondent added to the declared taxable income of the Company a sum of $70,156.49 realized

KEARNEY, J.:—The Court is here concerned with an appeal from a decision of the Income Tax Appeal Board reported as No. 565 v. M.N.R., 20 Tax A.B.C. 159, wherein the respondent’s (hereinafter sometimes referred to as ‘‘the taxpayer’’)

DUMOULIN, J.:—La compagnie J.-Euclide Perron Limitée, de Chicoutimi, province de Québec, excipe devant cette Cour d’une décision de la Commission d’Appel de l’Impôt, datée le 2 mai 1961 (27 Tax A.B.C. 245), qui rejetait sa contestation d’une recotisation de son

CATTANACH, J.:—This is an appeal against the appellant’s income tax assessment for the taxation year ending April 30, 1953.

THURLOW, J.:—In these proceedings the appellant appeals from a judgment of the Tax Appeal Board (25 Tax A.B.C. 91) by which his appeal from a re-assessment of income tax for the year 1955 was allowed in part and the Minister cross-appeals asking that

RITCHIE, D.J.:—This appeal is from a judgment of the Tax Appeal Board affirming a re-assessment of tax made by the Minister pursuant to the provisions of the Income Tax Act, on the appellant’s 1956 income. Little, if any, dispute exists