https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=58597 The Tribunal upheld the lower authorities' decision that the assessee, despite the flat in Bombay being owned by her husband and locked during their stay in Japan, maintained a dwelling place in India for over 182 days, making her a resident as per section 6(1)(b) of the Income Tax Act for the assessment year 1978-79. The Tribunal emphasized the legal right of the assessee to reside in the flat, considering it their home, and rejected the argument that surrendering the ration card affected this status. The appeal was dismissed, affirming the assessee's residential status as a resident for the relevant year. en-us Thu, 25 Aug 1988 00:00:00 +0530 Sun, 06 Feb 2011 03:30:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=58597 The Tribunal upheld the lower authorities' decision that the assessee, despite the flat in Bombay being owned by her husband and locked during their stay in Japan, maintained a dwelling place in India for over 182 days, making her a resident as per section 6(1)(b) of the Income Tax Act for the assessment year 1978-79. The Tribunal emphasized the legal right of the assessee to reside in the flat, considering it their home, and rejected the argument that surrendering the ration card affected this status. The appeal was dismissed, affirming the assessee's residential status as a resident for the relevant year. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 25 Aug 1988 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=58597