N.V. Balasubramanian, J.
1. The appeal is preferred against the order of the Tribunal, Madras 'D' Bench, dt.16th June, 1999, in WTA No. 133/Mad/1993 for the asst. yr. 1988-89.
2. The Revenue has challenged the order of the Tribunal directing the exclusion of the theatre complex of the assessee on the ground that it is exempted under s, 40(3)(vi) of the Finance Act, 1983. The following question of law has been framed for consideration :
'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is correct in law in confirming the order of the CIT(A) in directing the exclusion of the value of the theatre complex as exempt under Section 40(3)(vi) of the Finance Act, 1983 ?'
3. The assessment year involved in the instant case is 1988-89 and the question is whether the assessee is entitled to exemption under Section 40(3)(vi) of the Finance Act, 1983, for the asst. yr. 1988-89. A similar question of law came up for consideration before this Court in CWT v. Varadharaja Theatres (P) Ltd. (2000) 250 JTR 523 wherein this Court held that the exemption granted by the amendment of the Finance Act, 1988, would operate only from 1st April, 1989, and it is neither retrospective nor declaratory of the law. This Court in the above case has also held that cinema building owned by the assessee is not exempt under Section 40(3)(vi) of the Finance Act prior to 1st April, 1989. We hold that the ratio laid down by this Court in CWT v. Varadhaiaja Theatres (P) Ltd (supra) would apply for the asst. yr. 1988-89 as well as the exemption granted by the Finance Act, 1988, came into force w.e.f. 1st April, 1989. Following the decision in Vamdharaja Theatre case (supra), we hold that the Tribunal is not correct in its view that the theatre complex of the assessee is exempt under Section 40(3)(vi) of the Finance Act, 1983, for the asst. yr. 1988-89.
4. Consequently, the appeal stands allowed and the question of law framed is answered in favour of the Revenue. No costs.