Collier, J:—This is an appeal by the plaintiff against reassessments by the defendant whereby the defendant brought into taxable income for the years 1965 and 1967 the sums of $1,060 and $529.46 respectively. These amounts were received by the plaintiff

Martland, J (orally for the Court):—Since the adjournment yesterday we have had the opportunity fully to consider the submissions made on behalf of the appellant. We are all of the opinion that the judgment of the Exchequer Court was correct. The

Martland, J (orally for the Court):—We are all of the opinion that the decisions of the Tax Appeal Board and of the Exchequer Court were correct. The appeal is dismissed with costs.

Walsh, J:—Appellant is a Canadian corporation which carries on the business of manufacturing, selling and distributing various products in the marking and labelling field, including embossing machines and tapes, addressing machines, pressure sensitive labels and stencils sold

The Chief Justice:—This is an appeal from a judgment of the Trial Division dismissing the appellant’s appeals from his assessments under Part I of the Income Tax Act for the 1967 and 1968 taxation years.

The Chief Justice:—It is not necessary to call on you Mr Hynes. We are in agreement that the appeal fails. Where the relevant facts as of the time of the purchase are considered together with the subsequent events and the affirmations of

Heald, J:—These are appeals from reassessments of income tax payable for the taxation year 1967 in which the Minister of National Revenue seeks to tax as income, the gain realized on the disposition of certain real property owned jointly by two

Davey, CJBC (dissenting):—The respondent bank is the personal representative of the late Hugh Herbert Wolfenden who died on May 26, 1968 while resident and domiciled in the State of Nevada. When he died he owned 400 common shares of no par value

The Associate Chief Justice:—This is an appeal from income tax assessments dated June 10, 1969 whereby amounts of $60,000 and $40,000 deducted respectively for the years 1965 and 1966 as contributions to a pension plan were disallowed and added

Sheppard, DJ:—The issue raises the right of the appellant to deduct as capital from the payments of annuity made in the taxation years 1966 and 1967, by reason of the instalment refund guarantee clause in the policies in question under which the