Ethel Annabelle Angle v. Minister of National Revenue, [1969] CTC 624, 69 DTC 5423 -- text
SHEPPARD, D.J.:—This appeal is from an assessment by the Minister of National Revenue for adding sums to the income of the appellant as follows :
For 1966:
SHEPPARD, D.J.:—This appeal is from an assessment by the Minister of National Revenue for adding sums to the income of the appellant as follows :
For 1966:
GIBSON, J.:—These four appeals against re-assessments, all dated April 28, 1965, for income tax of the appellant for the taxation years 1959, 1960, 1961 and 1962, were tried together.
SEATON, J.:—The applicant seeks to invoke the summary procedure in Section 126A of the Income Tax Act, R.S.C. 1952,
CATTANACH, J.:—This is an appeal by the executors of the estate of Harris Cox, from an assessment by the Minister under Section 24 of the Estate Tax Act* [1] whereby the Minister included, in computing the aggregate net
SHEPPARD, D.J.:—This appeal is by the Minister of National Revenue on the issue whether or not the respondent, an anaesthetist, should be allowed for the year 1965 automobile expenses for two round trips each day from his home to the Royal Jubilee
KERR, J.:—This is an appeal from income tax assessments in respect of the appellant’s taxation years 1964, 1965 and 1966* [1] whereby the respondent disallowed deductions claimed by the appellant in computing its income as having been paid by it
ABBOTT, J. (concurred in by Fauteux, Martland, Judson, Ritchie and Hall, JJ.) :—This appeal is from a judgment of the Exchequer Court which allowed an appeal under Section 58 of the Excise Tax Act, R.S.C. 1952, c. 100, as amended, by
DUMOULIN, J. :—This i is an appeal from a decision of the Tax Appeal Board, dated September 8, 1964, in respect of the assessment of Upstream Holdings Inc., of the city of Montreal, for the taxation year 1962.
JUDSON, J. (all concur) :—The problem in these two appeals is essentially the same as that in the Smythe appeals [[1969] C.T.C. 558]. Wilbour Lee Craddock and Stanley Curtis Atkinson were the principal shareholders in a private Saskatchewan corporation
N OËL, J.:—The respondent, by motion, moves that this Court quash the appellant’s notice of appeal, dated May 15, 1969, by which the latter appealed from an assessment for the year 1964, confirmed by a decision of the Tax Appeal Board, dated January