9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (6) TMI 190X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng aggrieved by the order dated 3-4-2009 passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Bangalore Bench 'A' (hereinafter called as 'Tribunal' for brevity) bearing 1TA No. 1020/Bang/08 for the assessment year 2005-06. 2. The assessee is an employee of M/s. IBM Global Services India Pvt. Ltd. The employer issued a Deputation Letter to the assessee on 23-1-2004 directing him to work with designated IB ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pellate Tribunal, which has allowed the appeal partly by holding that for determining the status of the assessee as to whether he has to be assessed as a 'resident' or as a 'non-resident' of India, the period spent towards visit to India has to be deducted. The Tribunal held that the assessee was not in India for the requisite number of days under section 6(1)(c) and accordingly held that the asse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... more than 385 days during the past 4 years and his entire income was liable to tax as a resident of India, both under the Income-tax Act as well as DTAA between India and USA? 4. We have heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellants. The learned counsel reiterated the averments made out in the appeal and submitted that the assessee was in India for a period of 78 days during the current ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... India and therefore, he is to be treated as non-resident and cannot be taxed as a resident under section 6(1)(c). The said finding of fact is arrived at on the basis of the material on record. The Tribunal and the Appellate Authority have relied upon a certificate issued by Warton Residential, the employer, which is dated 18-1-2008. In the certificate, it is stated that the assessee was resident ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
