1998 (10) TMI 24

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... an individual. She was a partner in a firm. The firm owned certain assets which are eligible for exemption under section 5 of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957. The assessee contended that the net wealth of the firm was to be ascertained without making any deduction in respect of the exempted assets and the share in the firm so ascertained was to be added to the net wealth of the assessee and the assessee....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... rule 2 of the Wealth-tax Rules and not in the hands of each individual partner?" The year of assessment involved is 1979-80. A similar question was considered by this court in the case of R. Venkatavaradha Reddiar v. CWT [1995] 214 ITR 76, wherein this court has held that : "The principles relating to exemption which can be claimed by a partner of a firm under section 5(1)(iv) of the Wea....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....at the partner should be able to say that the property or any specific part thereof exclusively belongs to him. For the purpose of the benefit of exemption under section 5(1)(iv) of the Wealth-tax Act, the concept of habitability is inherent in the word 'house' and unless it is habitable, the word would not answer the common sense meaning of 'house'. A cinema theatre cannot answer the requireme....