DUMOULIN, J.:—At the start of the trial of Harry Hortick v. M.N.R., the parties agreed that the evidence adduced in the latter case should serve mutatis mutandis in the present instance.

DUMOULIN, J.:—This is an appeal from a decision of the Income Tax Appeal Board, dated September 20, 1962 (30 Tax A.B.C. 8), in respect of the assessment for taxation year 1956, of one Harry Hortick, of 4960 Glencairn Avenue, Montreal; the above-mentioned

THORSON, P.:—This is an appeal from the decision of the Tax Appeal Board (30 Tax A.B.C. 57), dated October 1, 1962, so far as it dismissed the appellant’s appeal against his income tax assessment for 1956. In his reply to the notice of appeal herein

CATTANACH, J.:—These are appeals against the appellant’s income tax assessments for the taxation years 1955 and 1957.

Ritchie, D.J.:—The Minister of National Revenue has appealed from the allowance by the Tax Appeal Board of an appeal of Steen Realty Limited in respect of a re-assessment dated April 24, 1957 by which $4,465.49 was added to its 1955 taxable income. For convenience of reference, the Minister of National Revenue and Steen Realty Limited hereinafter sometimes shall be referred to respectively as ‘‘the Minister’’ and ‘‘the company’’.

THORSON, P.:—This is an appeal against the estate tax levied in respect of the estate of Gordon Papp, deceased, late of the Town of Peace River, in Alberta so far as it included the amount of $50,000, being the proceeds of a policy of life insurance on the life of the said Gordon Papp paid to his widow Mae Ritter Papp, the beneficiary of the policy.

KEARNEY, J.:—This is an appeal from a notice of re-assessment whereby the Minister added to the appellant’s taxable income otherwise payable for its taxation year ended June 30, 1956 an amount of $26,000, which the Minister declared was a disbursement or

THURLOW, J.:—This is an appeal from a judgment of the Tax Appeal Board which allowed in part an appeal by the appellant against an assessment of income tax for the year 1954. The matter in issue is the right of the appellant to a deduction, in

Noel, .:—The appeal herein was dealt with by consent on the same evidence and argument as that of the appeal in the case of Clifton Lane, in which written reasons for judgment have been delivered this day under No. A-59 of this Court.

Noel, J.:—The appeal herein was dealt with by consent on the same evidence and argument as that of the appeal in the case of Clifton Lane, in which written reasons for judgment have been delivered this day under No. A-59 of this Court.