Query on Section 6 of IT Act - In view of Binny Bansal ITAT Bangalore Judgement

[Pankaj Singh]

Good afternoon,

My understanding has been that residential status under Section 6 of IT Act is to be determined independently for each FY, based only on the number of days of stay in that year & read with relaxation given in explanations which gives benefit of relaxed to 182 days to Citizen of India, or Person of Indian Origin who visits to India, without reference to residential status in earlier years.

However, in the Binny Bansal ITAT Bangalore held that while determining residential status, it is necessary to examine whether the person was a non-resident in preceding years, if yes, then only the benefit of relaxed 182 days from 60 days will be available.

Views requested on following -

1. How do generally read and apply Section 6 with explanation - is it treated as year-wise independent test, or has it commonly been applied by also considering the residential status in preceding years, as interpreted by the Tribunal in the Binny Bansal case?

2. In light of this judgment, do it is necessary to revisit and review residential status determinations of clients by examining their prior-year residential status, in line with the Tribunal’s interpretation?

Thanks & Regds

Pankaj Singh

AI Summary

Residential status under Section 6: whether the relaxed 182-day test depends on prior-year non resident status. The query asks whether residential status under Section 6 is a year-by-year test based solely on days of presence and the explanation providing a relaxed 182 days threshold for Citizens of India or Persons of Indian Origin, or whether entitlement to that relaxed threshold depends on being a non-resident in preceding years, as interpreted by an ITAT Bangalore decision, with consequent implications for revisiting prior-year determinations.