DUMOULIN, J.:—Dr. Edward Gordon Murphy, a Toronto medical practitioner, hereby appeals from a decision of the Tax Appeal Board, dated February 3, 1967 ( [1967] Tax A.B.C. 132), dismissing his initial appeal from an assessment made by the respondent, March 29, 1965, wherein, inter alia, an attempted income tax deduction of $6,000, for taxation year 1963, was disallowed.

JACKETT, P.:—This is an appeal from the appellant’s assessment under Part I of the Income Tax Act for the 1963 taxation year.* [1] The sole question raised by the appeal is whether Section 21(1) of the Income

JACKETT, P.:—This is an appeal from the appellant’s assessments under Part I of the Income Tax Act for the 1962 and 1963 taxation years. What is involved for 1962 is a profit of $23,375 that the appellant made in that year by

JACKET, P.:—This is an appeal from. the assessment under the Estate Tax Act of the estate of Harry M. Schiller, who died on May 23, 1965, resident and domiciled in Ontario. The only question involved in the appeal is whether the

FAUTEUX, J. (all concur) :—This is an appeal from a Judgment of the Exchequer Court of Canada, dismissing appellants’ appeal from an estate tax re-assessment made by the Minister of National Revenue and levying a tax in the net amount of $250,390.60 in

Davey, C.J.B.C. (oral) (all concur) :—This is an appeal by the Crown against the acquittal of Kern’s Motor Town Sales Limited on a charge made under the Income Tax Act and the Regulations that it failed to comply with subsection (1)

CATTANACH, J.:—This is an appeal from a decision of the Tax Appeal Board ( (1959), 23 Tax A.B.C. 33) dated October 6, 1959, whereby the appellant’s appeals against his assessments to income tax for his 1949, 1950 and 1951 taxation years were dismissed.

GIBSON, J.:—There are two issues in this appeal, viz., firstly, is the profit, (whatever the quantum of it) from a ‘‘business’’ within the meaning of that word as used in the Income Tax Act; and secondly, if the answer to

THURLOW, J.:—These appeals are from judgments* [1] of the Tax Appeal Board which dismissed the taxpayer’s appeal from a re-assessment of income tax for the year 1954 and allowed its appeal from a re-assessment of tax for the year 1957. In

THE Chief JusTICE (all concur) :—This is an appeal from a judgment of Cattanach, J. pronounced on February 28, 1967, dismissing the appellant’s appeal and allowing the respondent’s cross-appeal from a decision of the Chairman of the Tax Appeal Board and