Appellant's Salary Not Taxable in India Under DTAA Article 15(1) Due to Less Than 183 Days Stay

The ITAT, Bangalore held that the appellant, a full-time employee of a Japanese company, was not taxable in India on salary income under the DTAA between India and Japan. Despite an 83-day stay in India, the appellant did not exceed the 183-day threshold under Article 15(1) for Indian taxation. The salary was earned wholly in Japan for services rendered there, with no employment services performed for any Indian entity. The partial payment through the Indian branch did not constitute salary accrual in India. Consequently, the entire salary was held non-taxable in India. No issue arose regarding interest under section 234D, and that ground was dismissed.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Denial of exemption claimed by the assessee for salary income.
2. Eligibility for exemption under the Income Tax Act, 1961 and the Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (DTAA) between India and Japan.
3. Levy of interest under section 234D of the Income Tax Act.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Denial of Exemption Claimed by the Assessee for Salary Income:
The primary issue revolves around the denial of tax exemption on salary income claimed by the assessee. The assessee, a former employee of Motorola India, was transferred to Motorola Japan and worked there from May 2000 to April 2006. Despite working exclusively for Motorola Japan, his salary was paid in India for administrative convenience. The Assessing Officer (AO) disallowed the exemption and taxed the salary for the days the assessee was in India (45 days from April 1, 2005, to December 31, 2005, and 90 days from January 1, 2006, to March 31, 2006). The CIT(A) partially allowed the appeal, taxing 15 days' salary (Rs. 1,72,013) for the first period and the entire salary (Rs. 17,70,151) for the second period.

2. Eligibility for Exemption under the Income Tax Act, 1961 and the DTAA between India and Japan:
The assessee argued that he was a non-resident in India and a resident in Japan during the relevant period, thus eligible for tax exemption under both the Indian Income Tax Act and the India-Japan DTAA. Article 15(1) of the DTAA stipulates that salaries derived by a resident of a contracting state are taxable only in that state unless the employment is exercised in the other contracting state. Since the assessee was present in India for only 83 days, he did not meet the 183-day threshold for taxation in India. Furthermore, the salary was accrued in Japan, where the employment services were rendered, and thus should not be taxed in India.

3. Levy of Interest under Section 234D of the Income Tax Act:
This issue was not argued during the hearing, and hence, the ground regarding the levy of interest under section 234D was dismissed.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal concluded that the assessee was a non-resident of India and a tax resident of Japan for the relevant period. Under Article 15(1) of the India-Japan DTAA, the salary income was not taxable in India as the assessee did not meet the 183-day presence requirement. The salary was earned for services rendered in Japan and was not taxable in India under sections 5(2) and 9(1)(ii) of the Income Tax Act. Consequently, the appeal was partly allowed, granting the exemption for the entire salary income, while the ground related to interest under section 234D was dismissed.

---