FEMA residence test under Section 2(v) kept immovable property and remittance transactions outside regulatory violations.

Residence status under FEMA turned on whether the respondents fell within the statutory definition of "person resident in India" under Section 2(v). On the stated facts, their stay in India for more than 182 days, business visa entry, business activity in India, RBI clarification, and routing of consideration and remittances through banking channels with FIRC support took the matter outside the statutory exceptions. As a result, the immovable property, capital account, investment and establishment regulations were treated as inapplicable, and no perversity or legal error in the Tribunal's appreciation of evidence was shown. The note states that the finding of no FEMA violation and the setting aside of confiscation and penalty were upheld.

---

---

Issues: Whether the respondents satisfied the definition of "person resident in India" under Section 2(v) of the Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999, and whether the impugned transactions for purchase of immovable property and receipt of funds attracted the FEMA regulations and penalties.

Analysis: The respondents had stayed in India for more than 182 days during the preceding financial year, had entered India on a business visa, carried on business in India, had sought and obtained RBI clarification, and had routed the purchase consideration and inward remittances through banking channels supported by FIRC certificates. On these facts, the statutory exceptions to Section 2(v) were not attracted. The applicable investment, capital account, immovable property, and establishment regulations under FEMA were therefore inapplicable, and no perversity or legal error in the Tribunal's appreciation of evidence was shown.

Conclusion: The respondents were correctly held to be persons resident in India, the violations of FEMA were not established, and the order setting aside confiscation and penalty was rightly upheld. The appeal failed, and the connected writ petition became infructuous.

---