Mahoney, J:—The question in issue is the liability to tax of a profit of $1,115,633.75 realized by the plaintiff on the disposition of an apartment complex known as Fiemingdon Park after it had owned the same for some eleven months.

Cattanach, J:—These are appeals by the plaintiff from its assessments to income tax by the Minister of National Revenue for its taxation years ending May 31, 1970, 1971 and 1972.

The Chief Justice (Concurred in by St-Germain, DJ):—This is an appeal from a judgment of the Trial Division dismissing, with costs, an appeal from a decision of the Tax Review Board confirming an assessment under the Estate Tax Act.

Bastin, DJ:—This action is an appeal from a decision of the Tax Appeal Board dated September 13, 1973 whereby an appeal by the defendant against a reassessment of the Minister of National Revenue for the 1969 taxation year in which the Minister

Walsh, J:—Three motions came before the Court in this matter as follows:

Collier, J (orally):—When the plaintiff filed his income tax return for the 1969 taxation year he elected under section 42 of the Income Tax Act, RSC 1952, c 148 and amendments, to pay tax on the basis of averaging

Heald, J:—This is an appeal by the plaintiff from the judgment of the Tax Review Board dated June 26, 1972 wherein the defendant’s appeal was allowed in respect of the assessment for income tax made by the Minister of National Revenue for the

Thurlow, J (concurred in by Ryan, J and Sheppard, DJ—judgment delivered from the Bench):—The question raised by this appeal is whether an amount of $100,000 which the appellant received in its 1967 taxation year from Jackson Brothers Logging Company Limited was

The Chief Justice (concurred in by Mackay and Sweet, DJJ—judgment delivered from the Bench):—This is an appeal from a judgment of the Trial Division dismissing an appeal from the appellant’s assessments under Part I of the Income

Thurlow, J (concurred in by Ryan, J):—This appeal is from a judgment of the Trial Division which dismissed the appellant’s appeal from reassessments of income tax for the years 1964, 1965, 1966 and 1967. The question at issue with respect to all