Pratte, J (judgment delivered from the Bench):—This is an appeal and a cross-appeal from a judgment of the Trial Division which allowed in part the appellant’s appeal from the reassessment of his income tax for the 1965 taxation year.

Pratte, J:—Plaintiff is appealing from an assessment, dated May 9, 1972, determining the amount of income tax payable by it for the year 1970.

Cattanach, J:—The plaintiffs named in the styles of cause are barristers and solicitors carrying on their profession in partnership under the firm name and style of Holmes, Crowe, Power and Johnston at the City of Red Deer, in the Province of

Thurlow, J (per curiam—judgment delivered from the Bench):—We do not need to hear you Mr Chalmers and Mr Lefebvre. Notwithstanding the very able argument of Mr Vineberg on behalf of the appellant we are all of the opinion that the

Cattanach, J:—This is an appeal by Her Majesty the Queen from a decision by the Tax Review Board whereby the defendant’s appeal from an assessment made by the Minister of National Revenue in respect of the defendant’s taxation year. ending June 30, 1969 was

Cattanach, J:—This is an appeal from an assessment to income tax by the Minister for the plaintiff’s taxation year ending October 31, 1968.

Walsh, J:—This is an appeal by the Minister of National Revenue from a judgment of the Tax Review Board dated April 26, 1972 allowing defendant’s appeal from assessments dated July 14, 1970 for the taxation years 1967 and 1968 whereby the sums

Sheppard, DJ:—The issue is whether the plaintiff Myer Franks Ltd “produced or manufactured in Canada” within paragraph 27(1 )(a) of the Excise Tax Act so as to be liable to pay sales tax of 12%

Urie, J:—The plaintiff herein appeals to this Court from the reassessment for income tax by the Minister of National Revenue for the years 1967 and 1968, wherein he deducted from the plaintiff’s profits attributable to the production of prime metal from

Mahoney, J:—This is an appeal from a decision of the Tax Appeal Board, as it then was, confirming the respondent’s assessment of the appellant’s corporation income tax for its 1965 and 1966 taxation years on the ground that the corporation income