9911796707
TMI Blog2004 (8) TMI 33X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he said firm, which was determined keeping in view the amounts invested therein - "1. Whether the assessees was entitled to the deduction permissible under section 5(1)(iv), in respect of the immovable property belonging to the firm? - we answer this question No. 1 in the negative, i.e., in favour of the Revenue and against the respondent-assessee2. Whether the reversionary value of the land of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s were partners? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the reversionary value of the land of the cinema building could be added to the market value worked out on yield basis?" The present reference relates to the assessment years 1975-76 and 1976-77. The respondent-assessees are partners in the firm styled as M/s. Laxmi Talkies, Mathura. The Wealth-tax Officer treated ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... grawal, learned counsel appearing for the respondent-assessee. Sri Shambhoo Chopra, learned counsel, fairly stated that question No. 2 is covered against the Revenue in view of the decision of this court in CWT v. Ram Saran Kajriwal [1987] 168 ITR 485. So far as the first question is concerned, he submitted that under section 5(1)(iv) of the Act exemption is available to the house property and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... against the Revenue. So far as the first question is concerned, we are of the opinion that under section 5(1)(iv) of the Act exemption has been granted to one house or part of the house belonging to the assessee. House is a building where people live and reside. It is mainly for residential purposes. Cinema building cannot by any stretch of imagination be treated as a house. This court in I.T.R ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
