Kerr, J:—This is an appeal by the plaintiff from a judgment of the Tax Review Board respecting an assessment of income tax for the plaintiff’s taxation years 1967 to 1970 inclusive. The Minister disallowed claimed deductions from income of interest on

Mahoney, J:—Two amounts in respect of the calculation of the plaintiff’s 1969 taxable income are in issue. One is the deduction from income of $128,040 claimed by the plaintiff, being “gross profits on books on hand at wholesalers”, disallowed by the Minister of

Urie, J (concurred in by Pratte, J and Sheppard, DJ) (judgment delivered from the Bench):—The judgment appealed from is that rendered in one of four appeals arising from reassessments for income tax: levied by the respondent, tried together in the Trial

Walsh, J:—This is an appeal from a decision of the Tax Appeal Board dated December 8, 1970 with respect to income tax assessments for appellant’s 1965 taxation year.

Walsh, J:—Plaintiff appeals from income tax assessments for the taxation years ending November 30, 1967, December 31, 1967 and December 31, 1968. Its declaration sets forth that it operates a chain of retail automotive exhaust system installation shops and that as of

Addy, J:—The plaintiff is appealing from a decision of the Tax Review Board dismissing its appeal to that Board. The dispute centres on the following facts: Marie Léonide Landes and Désiré Camille Séguin were married under the system of separation of property pursuant

Heald, J:—This is an appeal in respect of income tax assessments for the taxation years 1966 and 1967 wherein the respondent disallowed a farm loss of the appellant in the sum of $1,034.59 in the taxation year 1966 and in the sum of $1,671.32 in the

Judge Grossberg (orally):—It will not assist me to reserve judgment in this case. It is better if I now give my decision and reasons while the evidence and the arguments of counsel are fresh in my mind.

Gibson, J:—These three appeals were heard on common evidence. The three appellants and one Roderick J Smith, as chartered accountants, carried on their practice in partnership from 1955 to January 15, 1966 when the partnership was dissolved. After that time,

Décary, J (orally):—The point at issue is whether or not a payment equivalent to a portion of a deduction of 2% of the earnings of defendant to a fund to be used partially for income-replacement purposes in case of total disability or