( 1 ) THE Wealth-tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi, has referred the following question of law under section 27 (1) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957 (hereinafter referred to as the "act") for opinion to this court : 1. Whether the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal is legally correct in holding that the assessee was entitled to exemption under Section 5 (1) (iv) of the Wealth-tax Act in respect of his share in the value of immovable property which belonged to the firm of which the asses-see is a partner ? ( 2 ) THE present reference relates to the assessment year 1981-82. The respondent is a partner in a partnership firm which owns an immovable property named Sree Talkies, Agra. He claimed exemption under Section 5 (1) (iv) of the Act in respect of the said building. The exemption was denied by the Wealth-tax Officer. However, it was accepted by the Appellate Assistant commissioner which order has been upheld by the Tribunal. ( 3 ) WE have heard Shri A. N. Mahajan, the learned standing counsel for the Revenue. ( 4 ) THE question is as to whether a cinema building can be said to be a house or not, has been decided by this court in the case of CIT v. Jai Kishan Gupta [2003] 264 ITR 482 and this court has held that the cinema building cannot be treated as a house. It is not a dwelling place and people do not reside there. Exemption under Section 5 (1) (iv) of the Act is available to a house and by no stretch of imagination a cinema building can be said to be a house. ( 5 ) IN this view of the matter exemption under Section 5 (1) (iv) of the Act is not available to a partner or to an assessee in respect of cinema building. ( 6 ) RESPECTFULLY following the aforesaid decision we answer the question referred to us in the negative, i. e. , in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee. However, there shall be no order as to costs. . .