DIT v. Manoj Kumar Reddy Nare

12 Taxmann.com 326High Court2011#7636 most cited

What is DIT v. Manoj Kumar Reddy Nare authority for?

The date of arrival in India should be excluded when calculating the number of days an assessee has stayed in India for the purpose of determining residency under Section 6(1) of the Income Tax Act.

14

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2025.

Also referred to as

DIT v. Manoj Kumar Reddy Nare · Section 6(1) · residency in India · days of stay · date of arrival · calculation of days · taxability of non-resident

Sections most often in play

Section 115CSection 132Section 132(4)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 250

Issues it is cited on

section 6(1)section 158bbretracted statementsection 69bsection 132(1)section 158bsection 158agricultural incomenon-residentsection 132(4)salarysection 139(1)

Judgments citing DIT v. Manoj Kumar Reddy Nare

Sanjay Bhaskar, New Delhi vs. DCIT Central Cir 13, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1655/DEL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 132Section 132(1)Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 250Section 6(1)

…ITA No.1650, 1653 to 1655/Del/2024 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI “G” BENCH: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.1650, 1653 to 1655/Del/2024 [Assessment Year :2017-18 to 2020-21] Sanjay Bhaskar vs DCIT Tribhuwan Complex, Central Circle-13 10th Milestone, Mathura Road, New Delhi Ishwar Nagar, Delhi-110065 PAN-AFCPB7690G APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by Shri Ankit Kumar, Adv. Respondent by Ms. Rupinder Kaur, CIT DR Date of Hearing 17.11.2025 Date of Pronouncement 30.12.2025 ORDER PER MANISH AGARWAL, AM : The captioned appeals ar…

Sanjay Bhaskar, New Delhi vs. DCIT Central Cir 13, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1654/DEL/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Dec 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 132Section 132(1)Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 250Section 6(1)

…ITA No.1650, 1653 to 1655/Del/2024 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI “G” BENCH: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.1650, 1653 to 1655/Del/2024 [Assessment Year :2017-18 to 2020-21] Sanjay Bhaskar vs DCIT Tribhuwan Complex, Central Circle-13 10th Milestone, Mathura Road, New Delhi Ishwar Nagar, Delhi-110065 PAN-AFCPB7690G APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by Shri Ankit Kumar, Adv. Respondent by Ms. Rupinder Kaur, CIT DR Date of Hearing 17.11.2025 Date of Pronouncement 30.12.2025 ORDER PER MANISH AGARWAL, AM : The captioned appeals ar…

Sanjay Bhaskar, New Delhi vs. DCIT Central Cir 13, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1653/DEL/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 132Section 132(1)Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 250Section 6(1)

…ITA No.1650, 1653 to 1655/Del/2024 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI “G” BENCH: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.1650, 1653 to 1655/Del/2024 [Assessment Year :2017-18 to 2020-21] Sanjay Bhaskar vs DCIT Tribhuwan Complex, Central Circle-13 10th Milestone, Mathura Road, New Delhi Ishwar Nagar, Delhi-110065 PAN-AFCPB7690G APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by Shri Ankit Kumar, Adv. Respondent by Ms. Rupinder Kaur, CIT DR Date of Hearing 17.11.2025 Date of Pronouncement 30.12.2025 ORDER PER MANISH AGARWAL, AM : The captioned appeals ar…

Sanjay Bhaskar, New Delhi vs. DCIT Central Cir 13, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1650/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 132Section 132(1)Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 250Section 6(1)

…ITA No.1650, 1653 to 1655/Del/2024 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI “G” BENCH: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.1650, 1653 to 1655/Del/2024 [Assessment Year :2017-18 to 2020-21] Sanjay Bhaskar vs DCIT Tribhuwan Complex, Central Circle-13 10th Milestone, Mathura Road, New Delhi Ishwar Nagar, Delhi-110065 PAN-AFCPB7690G APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by Shri Ankit Kumar, Adv. Respondent by Ms. Rupinder Kaur, CIT DR Date of Hearing 17.11.2025 Date of Pronouncement 30.12.2025 ORDER PER MANISH AGARWAL, AM : The captioned appeals ar…

DCIT, Exemption Circle, Ghaziabad vs. Kanpur Development Authority, Kanpur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1655/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Mar 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 132Section 132(1)Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 250Section 6(1)

…ITA No.1650, 1653 to 1655/Del/2024 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI “G” BENCH: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.1650, 1653 to 1655/Del/2024 [Assessment Year :2017-18 to 2020-21] Sanjay Bhaskar vs DCIT Tribhuwan Complex, Central Circle-13 10th Milestone, Mathura Road, New Delhi Ishwar Nagar, Delhi-110065 PAN-AFCPB7690G APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by Shri Ankit Kumar, Adv. Respondent by Ms. Rupinder Kaur, CIT DR Date of Hearing 17.11.2025 Date of Pronouncement 30.12.2025 ORDER PER MANISH AGARWAL, AM : The captioned appeals ar…

Pradeep Kumar Joshi (L/H Smt. Sangeeta P. Joshi), Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-1 Int.Taxa., Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal preferred by the assessee is allowed

ITA 452/AHD/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Oct 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed& Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri Divyang Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Purushottam Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 3(1)(b)Section 6(1)(a)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, AHMEDABAD [CONDUCTED THROUGH VIRTUAL AT AHMEDABAD] BEFORE SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER& Ms. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No. 452/Ahd/2020 (Assessment Year: 2016-17) Pradeep Kumar Joshi (Late) Vs. ITO Represented by his wife and L/H. Ward-1, International Smt. Sangeeta P. Joshi Taxation, Ahmedabad A/10/103 La-habitat, Nr. Aiyana Complex, 100 Ft. Road Opp. Shukun Bungalows Off. S. G. Highway, Thaltej, Ahmedabad- 380059 [PAN No. AAQPJ7981F] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Divyang Shah, AR Revenue by : Shri Purushottam Kumar, Sr. DR Da…

Shri Jitendra Virwani, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle - 1(3), Bangalore

In the result, the appeals by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 1217/BANG/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Jul 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.

For Appellant: Shri S. Ramasubramaniam, CAFor Respondent: Shri K.R. Narayana, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 6(1)(a)Section 6(1)(c)

…arrival should be excluded while calculating the number of days present in India. It was held that the date of arrival should be excluded. The above decision of the Tribunal has been upheld by the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in DIT Vs Manoj Kumar Reddy Nare, 12 Taxmann.com 326. The assessee worked out his presence in India during the FY 2008-09 to 2011- 12 and furnished the details in page nos. 238 to 245 of the Paper Book. The assessee had not stayed in India for any year for a period of more than 182 days. ITA Nos.1211 to 1217/Bang/2019 Page 37 of 73 61. It was further submitted that a perusal of the section…

Shri Jitendra Virwani, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle - 1(3), Bangalore

In the result, the appeals by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 1216/BANG/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Jul 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.

For Appellant: Shri S. Ramasubramaniam, CAFor Respondent: Shri K.R. Narayana, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 6(1)(a)Section 6(1)(c)

…arrival should be excluded while calculating the number of days present in India. It was held that the date of arrival should be excluded. The above decision of the Tribunal has been upheld by the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in DIT Vs Manoj Kumar Reddy Nare, 12 Taxmann.com 326. The assessee worked out his presence in India during the FY 2008-09 to 2011- 12 and furnished the details in page nos. 238 to 245 of the Paper Book. The assessee had not stayed in India for any year for a period of more than 182 days. ITA Nos.1211 to 1217/Bang/2019 Page 37 of 73 61. It was further submitted that a perusal of the section…

Shri Jitendra Virwani, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle - 1(3), Bangalore

In the result, the appeals by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 1215/BANG/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Jul 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.

For Appellant: Shri S. Ramasubramaniam, CAFor Respondent: Shri K.R. Narayana, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 6(1)(a)Section 6(1)(c)

…arrival should be excluded while calculating the number of days present in India. It was held that the date of arrival should be excluded. The above decision of the Tribunal has been upheld by the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in DIT Vs Manoj Kumar Reddy Nare, 12 Taxmann.com 326. The assessee worked out his presence in India during the FY 2008-09 to 2011- 12 and furnished the details in page nos. 238 to 245 of the Paper Book. The assessee had not stayed in India for any year for a period of more than 182 days. ITA Nos.1211 to 1217/Bang/2019 Page 37 of 73 61. It was further submitted that a perusal of the section…

Shri Jitendra Virwani, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle - 1(3), Bangalore

In the result, the appeals by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 1214/BANG/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Jul 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.

For Appellant: Shri S. Ramasubramaniam, CAFor Respondent: Shri K.R. Narayana, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 6(1)(a)Section 6(1)(c)

…arrival should be excluded while calculating the number of days present in India. It was held that the date of arrival should be excluded. The above decision of the Tribunal has been upheld by the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in DIT Vs Manoj Kumar Reddy Nare, 12 Taxmann.com 326. The assessee worked out his presence in India during the FY 2008-09 to 2011- 12 and furnished the details in page nos. 238 to 245 of the Paper Book. The assessee had not stayed in India for any year for a period of more than 182 days. ITA Nos.1211 to 1217/Bang/2019 Page 37 of 73 61. It was further submitted that a perusal of the section…

Shri Jitendra Virwani, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle - 1(3), Bangalore

In the result, the appeals by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 1213/BANG/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Jul 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.

For Appellant: Shri S. Ramasubramaniam, CAFor Respondent: Shri K.R. Narayana, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 6(1)(a)Section 6(1)(c)

…arrival should be excluded while calculating the number of days present in India. It was held that the date of arrival should be excluded. The above decision of the Tribunal has been upheld by the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in DIT Vs Manoj Kumar Reddy Nare, 12 Taxmann.com 326. The assessee worked out his presence in India during the FY 2008-09 to 2011- 12 and furnished the details in page nos. 238 to 245 of the Paper Book. The assessee had not stayed in India for any year for a period of more than 182 days. ITA Nos.1211 to 1217/Bang/2019 Page 37 of 73 61. It was further submitted that a perusal of the section…

Shri. Jitendra Virwani, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle - 1(3), Bangalore

In the result, the appeals by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 1212/BANG/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Jul 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.

For Appellant: Shri S. Ramasubramaniam, CAFor Respondent: Shri K.R. Narayana, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 6(1)(a)Section 6(1)(c)

…arrival should be excluded while calculating the number of days present in India. It was held that the date of arrival should be excluded. The above decision of the Tribunal has been upheld by the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in DIT Vs Manoj Kumar Reddy Nare, 12 Taxmann.com 326. The assessee worked out his presence in India during the FY 2008-09 to 2011- 12 and furnished the details in page nos. 238 to 245 of the Paper Book. The assessee had not stayed in India for any year for a period of more than 182 days. ITA Nos.1211 to 1217/Bang/2019 Page 37 of 73 61. It was further submitted that a perusal of the section…

Shri Jitendra Virwani, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle - 1(3), Bangalore

In the result, the appeals by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 1211/BANG/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Jul 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.

For Appellant: Shri S. Ramasubramaniam, CAFor Respondent: Shri K.R. Narayana, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 6(1)(a)Section 6(1)(c)

…arrival should be excluded while calculating the number of days present in India. It was held that the date of arrival should be excluded. The above decision of the Tribunal has been upheld by the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in DIT Vs Manoj Kumar Reddy Nare, 12 Taxmann.com 326. The assessee worked out his presence in India during the FY 2008-09 to 2011- 12 and furnished the details in page nos. 238 to 245 of the Paper Book. The assessee had not stayed in India for any year for a period of more than 182 days. ITA Nos.1211 to 1217/Bang/2019 Page 37 of 73 61. It was further submitted that a perusal of the section…

R. Kundan & Co., Mumbai vs. ITO WD 14(3)(2), Mumbai

ITA 6143/MUM/2013[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Oct 2015AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Rajesh Kumar

Section 132Section 5Section 6Section 6(1)(c)Section 9

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, मुंबई "यायपीठ,बी,मुंबई । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES “B”, MUMBAI "ी जो"ग"दर "संह, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी राजेश कुमार, लेखा सद"य, के सम" Before Shri Joginder Singh, Judicial Member, and Shri Rajesh Kumar, Accountant Member ITA NOs.4596 to 4598/Mum/2012 Assessment Years- 2007-08 to 2009-10 DCIT, CC-40, Mr. Binod Kumar Singh, Room NO.653, 6th Floor, 9th Floor, Opp. Asian Paints, बनाम/ Aayakar Bhavan, LBS Marg, Bhandup, Vs. M.K. Road, Mumbai-400078 Mumbai-400020 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) PAN. No.AMXPS1998L Cross Objections Nos.148 to 150/Mum/2013 (Arising out of IT…