Dwelling place "maintained for" a person requires a legal right to occupy; sporadic use of family home does not create residence.

Section 4A(a)(ii) requires that a person must have a dwelling place "maintained for him" in British India to be treated as resident; this means a dwelling in which the person has a legal right or established entitlement to occupy, whether by ownership, tenancy, proprietary or contractual arrangement, or where another maintains it for him with such entitlement. Mere hospitality, sporadic use of a house owned and occupied by parents, or remittances for family maintenance do not satisfy the test. On the facts, no separate legal right or established dwelling existed and residency was not established.

---

---

Issues: Whether, on the facts found by the Tribunal, the applicant had a dwelling place "maintained for him" and was therefore a resident in British India within the meaning of Section 4A(a)(ii) of the Income-tax Act in the year of account.

Analysis: The statutory definition requires that an individual "maintains or has maintained for him a dwelling place" in British India for specified periods. "Maintains a dwelling place" denotes ownership, tenancy, or other proprietary or contractual arrangement giving a legal right of occupation. "Has maintained for him" covers situations where another person or manager maintains a dwelling which the individual has a legal right to occupy during visits (for example, members of undivided families where a manager provides occupation rights). Mere sporadic use or occupation of a house owned and occupied by parents, without any legal right of occupation or an establishment kept for the individual, does not amount to having a dwelling place "maintained for him." The facts show the assessee conducted business and usually resided in Ceylon, visited British India sporadically, stayed in his mother's house (owned and occupied by his parents), and remitted money for family maintenance; there was no legal right, separate establishment, or continuous availability of a dwelling maintained for the assessee.

Conclusion: The applicant did not have a dwelling place "maintained for him" within the meaning of Section 4A(a)(ii) and therefore was not a resident in British India for the years in question; the question is answered in the negative and against the Commissioner of Income-tax.

Ratio Decidendi: For the purposes of Section 4A(a)(ii) a dwelling place is "maintained for" a person only where he has a legal right or an established entitlement to occupy a dwelling (including where another maintains it for him with such an entitlement); mere hospitality, sporadic use of a house belonging to others, or remittances for family maintenance do not satisfy the statutory test.

---