https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=65138 For wealth-tax exemption under section 5(1)(iv), property held by a firm was treated as belonging to the assessee-partner, so the exemption remained available even though the asset stood in the firm's name. The objection that the property was a cinema building used for commercial purposes was not examined further because the Board's circular was treated as binding and as settling that aspect. On that basis, the partner was held entitled to the exemption and the revenue's challenge failed. en-us Mon, 27 Sep 1982 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 12 Feb 2011 14:59:09 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=65138 For wealth-tax exemption under section 5(1)(iv), property held by a firm was treated as belonging to the assessee-partner, so the exemption remained available even though the asset stood in the firm's name. The objection that the property was a cinema building used for commercial purposes was not examined further because the Board's circular was treated as binding and as settling that aspect. On that basis, the partner was held entitled to the exemption and the revenue's challenge failed. Case-Laws Wealth-tax Mon, 27 Sep 1982 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=65138