CATTANACH, J.:—The appeals of the three appellants named in the style of cause herein are from assessments to income tax for their respective 1960, 1961, 1962 and 1963 taxation years and all appeals were heard together on common evidence because the identical

Gibson, J.:—There are two issues for decision on this appeal of The International Nickel Company of Canada, Limited from assessments for income tax for the taxation years 1958, 1959, 1960 and 1961 respectively.

THURLOW, J.:—The issue in each of these appeals, which are from re-assessments of income tax, in some cases for the years 1961 and 1962 and in others for the year 1962 alone, is whether in these years the ten appellant companies were ‘associated” with each other within the meaning of Section 39 of the Income Tax Act and thus liable to tax at the higher rate prescribed by that section rather than at the lower rate which would otherwise be applicable.

CATTANACH, J.:—This is an appeal from the assessment to income tax by the Minister for the 1963 taxation year by Nassau Leasings Limited, a company incorporated pursuant to the laws of the Province of Ontario by letters patent dated January 25, 1960 with

Wilson, C.J.:—This is an appeal pursuant to Section 15 of the Social Services Tax Act, R.S.B.C. 1960, c. 361, from a confirmation by the Minister of Finance dated October 31, 1966 of an assessment of tax against the appellant dated

THE Chief JUSTICE (concurred in by Judson, Hall and Spence, J J. ) :—The relevant facts are set out in the reasons of my brother Pigeon which I have had the advantage of reading.

Noël, J.:—This is an appeal from a decision of the Tax Appeal Board (40 Tax A.B.C. 39) dismissing the appellant’s appeal from a re-assessment of the appellant’s liability for income tax under Part I of the Income Tax Act for the

CATTANACH, J.:—The suppliant by its petition of right seeks to recover the sum of $355,412.48 paid by it to Her Majesty under protest and without admission of liability pursuant to demands made by the officers of the Department of National Revenue as tax

JACKETT, P.:—In this income tax appeal, there was argued before me, on an order made by the Court of its own motion to the respondent to show cause, the question whether this appeal should be quashed on the ground that there is no appellant.

Gibson, J.:—This is an appeal from an assessment dated January 2, 1968 under the Estate Tax Act wherein an estate tax in the sum of $59,592.04 was assessed in respect to the estate of Kate Daintry Malloch, deceased.