THORSON, P.:—This is an appeal against the appellant’s income tax assessment for 1958.

KEARNEY, J.:—This is an appeal from a decision of the Income Tax Appeal Board dated June 18, 1959, 22 Tax A.B.C. 196, which affirmed a re-assessment made by the respondent dated October 7, 1957, whereby the appellant was required to add to his taxable

THORSON, P.:—This is an appeal from the decision of the Income Tax Appeal Board, 22 Tax A.B.C. 421, dated September 11, 1959, dismissing the appellant’s appeal against his income tax assessment for 1957.

'. TASCHEREAU, J.:—During the relevant periods, the respondent was engaged in the processing of raw sheepskin which it transformed into finished mouton skins and shearling. It alleges in its petition that from March 30, 1950 to January 29, 1952, it was

THURLOW, J.:—This is an appeal from an assessment of income tax for the year 1957, the issue between the parties being whether the appellant was during that year a foreign business corporation and thus entitled to exemption from taxation pursuant to Section

THURLOW, J.:—These are appeals from assessments made pursuant to Section 123(10) of the Income Tax Act, R.S.C. 1952,

THORSON, P.:—This is an appeal from the decision of the Income Tax Appeal Board, sub nom. No. 548 v. M.N.R. (1958), 20 Tax A.B.C. 39, dated July 22, 1958, allowing the respondent’s appeal against his income tax assessment

MITCHELL, J.:—The Court, having heard the parties by their respective counsel on the merits of the petitioner’s petition, examined the proceedings and the proof of record and deliberated, doth now render the following judgment:

CAMERON, J.:—This is an appeal by the taxpayer from a decision of the Income Tax Appeal Board dated June 13, 1960 (24 Tax A.B.C. 353) which dismissed its appeals from assessments made upon it for its taxation years ending December 31, 1953 and 1954.

DUMOULIN, J.:—This appeal was heard jointly with another entitled M.N.R. v . Massawipp Valley Railway Company bearing number 152825 of the records of this Court.

The relevant material in each admittedly raised similar points of law, so that all motivating reasons and the conclusions reached in M.N.R. v. Massawippi Valley Railway Company also apply to this appeal as integral component parts thereof.