TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (4) TMI 1253
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....be briefly set out before adjudicating on the grounds raised by the assessee. 1.1 The admitted facts are that the assessee is a US citizen who was on an international assignment to India between May, 2011 till February, 2020. Admittedly, the assessee qualifies as Resident and Ordinary Resident (ROR) of India as per section 6 of the Act. Also, the appellant qualifies as a Resident of US for the calendar year 2019-20. Considering this dual status, as per the provisions of Article 4(2) of the India-US Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (DTAA) for determining his treaty residency for the relevant assessment year, the assessee filed his return of income (ROI) declaring a total income of Rs. 21,46,19,810/-. Additionally, the US income of Rs. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....also CBDT's Circular No.333 dated 02.04.1982. Thereafter, the Ld. AR read out Article 4(2) of the India-US DTAA. For the sake of context, the relevant provision deserves to be extracted as under: - "Where by reason of the provisions of paragraph 1, an individual is a resident of both Contracting States, then his status shall be determined as follows: (a) he shall be deemed to be a resident of the State in which he has a permanent home available to him; if he has a permanent home available to him in both States, he shall be deemed to be a resident of the State with which his personal and economic relations are closer (center of vital interests); (b) if the State in which he has his center of vital interests cannot ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s also been placed on certain International case laws. 2.1 The Ld. DR, on the other hand, argued that the assessee never furnished adequate details before the Ld. AO and this was evident from para 3.4 of his order where on page 8 the following is mentioned: "Without prejudice to the above, it can be seen that number of opportunities were given to the assessee for furnishing the detail of interest income, dividend Income and income from house property claimed exempt by him in the return of Income. However no specific details were furnished by the assessee. It is Important to mention that vide notice dated 13/08/2022 that u/s 142(1) of IT Act, the assessee was pointed out deficiency in his earlier submissions in this regard and al....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....in the US which was what it was after being clubbed together with the income of his wife. The Ld. DR also pointed out that the assessee's place of birth was in India and thus, there cannot be any doubt that he would have familial ties here. The Ld. DR assailed the contention of the assessee that his economic and personal ties were greater in the US than in India, on the ground that at least the economic ties were far substantial in India as compared to the US. The Ld. DR concluded his arguments by saying that in the absence of specific details which could clinch the tax status of the assessee, the Ld. AO drew his conclusions from the documents available with him, and rightly so. 3. We have carefully considered the arguments from both sid....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....me small amounts, the major portion of the income of Rs. 4,62,85,467/- belonged to the assessee himself. The Ld. AR expressed his inability at this moment in time to give the exact breakup in this regard. At this juncture, we are handicapped by the lack of critical facts in deciding whether the benefit of "Tie-Break" should go in favour of the assessee when he claims close personal and economic ties with the US or, contrarily, agree with the findings of Ld. AO that such ties are rooted in India. At this stage, we need to discuss the case of Ashok Kumar Pandey of the ITAT, Mumbai reported in 167 taxmann.com 286 (Mum.)- ITA 3986/Mum/2023, order dated 03.10.2024. The Tribunal has laid down the following tests for determining the centre of vita....