ABBOTT, J. (orally for the Court) :—We agree with the finding made by the learned trial judge that on the facts the profits realized by the appellants on the sales of the farm lands in issue on these appeals were profits from a business. The appeals

JACKETT, P.:—This is an appeal from a decision of the Tariff Board under the Excise Tax Act on the following questions of law :

SHEPPARD, D.J.:—This appeal is by The Cattermole-Trethe- wey Contractors Ltd. against an income tax re-assessment by the Minister of National Revenue for the year 1966, on the ground of alleged errors in the re-assessment in disallowing certain disbursements for the

WALSH, J.:—The details of the real estate transactions giving rise to the present proceedings appear from the copies of the deeds filed as part of the documentary proof (Exhibit B-l) and are, moreover, admitted by the parties. The motivation which induced

JACKETT, P.:—This is an appeal from a decision of the Tax Appeal Board dismissing an appeal from the appellant’s assessment under Part I of the Income Tax Act for the 1965 taxation year.

FRASER, J.:—This motion is brought by Canada Permanent Trust Company and Beverley Chodikoff, executors and trustees of the will of the deceased, Marvin Edwin Chodikoff. For convenience I will refer to the executors and trustees as the trustees and to the late

JACKETT, P.:—This is an appeal from assessments under Part I of the Income Tax Act for the 1965 and 1966 taxation years, in which the question is whether the respondent erred in assessing the appellant, a company incorporated under the

Per Maclean, J.A., concurred in by Nemetz, J.A.: There was no conflict between Section 115 and Section 149 but, if there was, then Section 149, which appeared later in the statute, dealt with a specific matter,

JACKETT, P.:—This is an appeal from a Judgment of the Tax Appeal Board dismissing an appeal by the appellant from its assessments under Part I of the Income Tax Act for the 1956, 1957, 1958 and 1959 taxation years. In respect of

DUMOULIN, J.:—This is an appeal from the assessment made by the respondent with respect to the appellant’s 1964, 1965 and 1966 taxation years, adding to Larry Smith’s personal income for the above-mentioned fiscal periods revenues of $14,418.29, $14,337.81 and $16,134.21,