TMI Blog2021 (9) TMI 242X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , Accountant Member For the Appellant : Shri C. Sandeep, A.R. For the Respondent : Shri Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel for Dept. ORDER PER B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: The assessee has filed this miscellaneous application contending that there is mistake apparent from record in the order dated 24.5.2019 passed in ITA No.2579/Bang/2018. 2. The petition filed by the assessee reads as under: APPLICATION U/S 254(2) OF INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (ACT) The appellant seeks the leave of the Hon'ble Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Bangalore to file the following application u/s. 254(2) of the Act to rectify the mistake apparent from record. 1. The appellant is an employee of Tata Con ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... has been in India for 182 days or more even though he may have been in India for more than 365 days in 4 preceding years. The net effect of section 6(1) read with the Explanation is that for an individual who has left India for employment outside India, he should be treated as resident of India only if he was in India during the relevant period/year for 182 days or more. In other words, if an individual has spent less than 182 days in India during a previous year and was outside India for the purposes of employment, then regardless of his being in India for 365 days or more during 4 preceding previous years, he cannot be treated as a resident of India. In short the appellant submitted that his case is covered by S.6(1)(c ) of the Act. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lant in India in preceding four years is not relevant. The Hon'ble Member has not given a finding on the submission of the appellant that his case is covered by S.6(1)(a). Hence, it is humbly prayed that a finding on applicability of S.6(1)(a) may kindly be given) . 3. It is the submission of the assessee that the Tribunal has restored the issue to the file of the A.O. to examine the applicability of section 6(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act,1961 ['the Act' for short] while the assessee s case is covered by section 6(1)(a) of the Act. Accordingly, it is submitted that the order passed by Tribunal suffers from mistake apparent from record. 4. I heard the parties and perused the record. I notice from the decision given by T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
