9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (10) TMI 1066X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd Somil Agarwal. ORDER:- PER : I.C. SUDHIR The revenue has questioned first appellate order solely on the ground that the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of ₹ 4,77,12,271/- made by the AO. 2. We have heard and considered the arguments advanced by the parties in view of orders of the authorities below and the decisions relied upon. 3. The facts in brief are that the assessee, a world known professional golfer pursues the vocation of sportsman. During the year and in the earlier years he participated in the golf tournament in various countries and remained outside India for considerable period in these years. In his return of Income for the year filed in the status of Resident , the assessee declared ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gnored the observation of the AO that assessee had stayed in India for 167 days. He submitted further that the Ld. CIT(A) has given relief without verifying the alternative submission of the assessee that as per Article 17/18 of Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement entered into by India with those countries where the assessee received the amount for his participating in golf conducted by the foreign sports bodies could not be brought to tax in India. The Ld. CIT(A) has also erred in following the decision of Hon'ble Kerala High Court in the case of CIT v. Abdul Razak 337 ITR 267 (Kerala) treating the present assessee a sportsman going abroad for the purpose of employment. 5. The Ld. AR on the other hand tried to justify the first appe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing the facts. He has however not contended in specific term that above noted facts by the Ld. CIT(A) is not correct. The issue involved in the present case remained as to whether the assessee can be said to have left India for the purpose of employment and should he be entitled to the benefit of Explanation - (a) to section 6(1)(c) of the Act . Explanation- (a) to section 6(1) of the Act states that an Indian citizen who left India in previous year for the purpose of his employment outside India, the period of 60 days shall be substituted by 182 days to be treated as Resident in India. The term employment is not defined in the Act. In this regard the Ld. CIT(A) has taken strength from several decisions including the decision of Hon' ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... evant extract of the provisions laid down under section 6 Residence in India of the I.T. Act 1961 :- 6. For the purposes of this Act:- (1) An individual is said to be resident in India in any previous year. If he- (a) is in India in that year for a period or periods amounting in all to one hundred and eighty-two days or more ; or (b) .. (c) having within the four years preceding that year been in India for a period or periods amounting in all to three hundred and sixty five days or more is in India for a period or periods amounting in all to sixty days or more in that year. [Explanation-In the case of an individual.- (a) being a citizen of India, who leaves Indi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
