India applies two tests, and meeting either one makes a person resident for the whole Indian year. The first is a count of days present in the year itself. The second pairs a shorter stay in the year with presence in India across the preceding years, which is why somebody comfortable about the current year's travel can still be caught by it. Two further sets of rules sit on top of those: one for Indians leaving India for employment, one for visits by people of Indian origin. So the answer for any given year comes out of a count rather than a rule of thumb, and the count has to reach back into earlier years as well as the current one.
Who has to apply the 182/60+365 day residency tests?
- 15+Years of the founder's cross-border experience
- 18,000+Clients served across our offices in India, the USA, Canada and the UAE
- 5.0Google rating
- 4Global offices — India, USA, Canada & UAE
Anyone arriving in or leaving India mid-year, and NRIs visiting India for extended periods. The obligation is decided by facts rather than by tax owing, which is why a nil position does not remove it.
The rule on who files
Anyone arriving in or leaving India mid-year, and NRIs visiting India for extended periods.

The exception that catches people
Two tests, either of which makes a person resident, plus special rules for Indians leaving for employment and for visits by persons of Indian origin. A long visit home can change status for a whole year, which is why the count is kept contemporaneously.
Where to go from here
The full treatment — who it binds, the deadline, the penalty and the fixed fee — is on Residency: 182/60+365 day tests in India. Whatever you have is enough to start the conversation, including nothing but the dates.
Checked and signed off for the 2025 and 2026 filing seasons by Udit Gupta, International Tax, Cross-Border Tax & Transfer Pricing Expert, Legal Quotient Consultants. Written as general guidance, not as a recommendation for your situation. Talk it through with us before acting on it.
Cross-border situations we are engaged for
Arrival year day count rebuilt from stamps and boarding passes
A client who had moved to India partway through a year had filed on the assumption that only the months after arrival mattered. The count itself had never been done. We rebuilt it from immigration stamps, boarding passes and the airline's own record of the flights, then applied both tests to the completed year and to the preceding years the second test reaches back into. The engagement produced a dated day count schedule, a written determination of status for the year, and a filing position that followed the determination rather than the assumption it replaced.
Read how this one runsA departure year that turned on the employment rule rather than the count
A client had left India to take up a post abroad and had been told by friends that a certain number of days would settle the matter. The days alone did not settle it, because the rule reached by a departure for employment is not the ordinary one. The work consisted of assembling the contract, the start date, the work permit and the travel record, and testing whether the departure answered the description in the rule. The outcome was a determination for the departure year supported by the employment documents, and a note of what would have changed the answer.
Read how this one runsAn extended family visit that moved a whole year into charge
An NRI extended a planned visit home to care for a parent and stayed considerably longer than intended. Because status attaches to the whole Indian year, the extension put a full year of foreign income and foreign assets into a different treatment. The work was done before the filing date rather than after it: a completed count, a determination of status, and then a return prepared on the basis that the year was resident. The engagement produced a filed position consistent with the facts, and a forward calendar showing the point in the following year at which the same thing would happen again.
Read how this one runsThe second test caught a year the client believed was safe
A frequent traveller had kept each year's stay comfortably short and had never looked further back than the year in front of him. The second test pairs a shorter stay with presence across preceding years, and on the accumulated history it was met. The work consisted of counting several consecutive years rather than one, identifying the year in which the combination first bit, and setting out the consequence for each subsequent year. The engagement produced a multi year presence schedule and a determination for each year in it, replacing an assumption that had never been tested against the second test at all.
Read how this one runsA running day log built for a consultant flying in every few weeks
A consultant with work on both sides had no reliable record of his own movements and was reaching each year end without knowing where he stood. The engagement was preventative rather than corrective. We built a log kept as the trips happened, reconciled it quarterly against boarding passes and stamps, and produced a projection of the date on which each of the two tests would be met if the travel pattern continued. What it produced was a running count the client could read at any point in the year, and a note of the trips that would tip it.
Read how this one runsOne household and two different determinations once each partner was counted
A couple returning to India together assumed a single determination would cover both of them. Their travel histories were not the same: one had been out of India considerably longer than the other, and their trips home over the preceding years differed in both number and length. The work was two separate counts and two separate applications of the tests. What the work produced was a determination for each of them, which did not agree, and a short written explanation of why identical arrival dates had produced different statuses for the same year.
Read how this one runsA Student or Researcher Covered by a Treaty Article
Several treaties carry a dedicated article for students, trainees and visiting researchers that displaces the ordinary employment rules. Whether it applies turns on the purpose of the stay and the source of the funds, both of which are evidenced rather than asserted.
Read how this one runsResidency Changed Mid-Year and Both Returns Assumed a Full One
A move part-way through a year produces two part-year positions, not two full ones. The engagement establishes the date residence actually changed, allocates income either side of it, and amends whichever return was filed on the wrong footing.
Read how this one runsAll case studies — every published engagement in one place.
Core International & Cross-Border Tax Services
Strategy and compliance for income, assets and families spread across borders.
Industries & Client Types We Serve Worldwide
- Foreign VAT / GST / sales tax registrations
- Marketplace withholding reviews
- Inventory nexus & PE analysis
- Multi-currency books reconciled
- Cross-border revenue sourcing & withholding
- IP structuring with real substance
- Equity for cross-border teams
- U.S. expansion: entity & PE setup
- Reg 105 / 102 waivers
- Permanent establishment risk
- Partner mobility planning
- Cross-border withholding recovery
- Section 216 rental returns
- FIRPTA withholding recovery
- Section 116 clearance
- Treaty credit optimization
- Transfer pricing documentation (s.247)
- Customs value vs transfer price
- Foreign affiliate reporting (T1134)
- Country-by-country reporting
- Reg 105 & U.S. CWA agreements
- Multi-state & country calendars
- Touring income allocation
- Royalty & image-rights withholding
- Residency analysis before moving
- Employer payroll exposure
- Totalization & social security
- Foreign tax credits
Holding structures live or die on treaty access, beneficial ownership and substance — the MLI's principal-purpose test now sits over every arrangement.
A holding structure is only as good as its reporting. Foreign affiliates, accrued passive income and distributions each carry their own return, and the penalties on those attach to the form rather than to any tax being owed — so a structure that saves tax can still cost money if the information returns are late.
- Treaty access & PPT reviews
- FAPI & surplus computations
- Withholding-efficient routing
- Governance & substance
Residency: 182/60+365 day tests: further questions
There is no part year status under these tests. Residency is decided for the Indian year as a whole, so a stay that tips either test changes the treatment of the entire year, including the months before arrival and after departure. That is the trap in an extended family visit. A trip taken for reasons that have nothing to do with tax, and then extended by a few weeks because of an illness at home, can move a whole year of foreign income into charge. It is also the reason the day count is kept as the travel happens rather than reconstructed at the year end, by which point the decision has been made for you.
Somebody leaving India to take up employment abroad is dealt with under a rule of its own rather than the ordinary count, so the departure year often turns on the character of the departure and the evidence for the employment, not only on the number of days. In practice that means the position has to be supportable from documents: an employment contract, a start date, the work permit or visa relied on, and a departure date consistent with all of them. Where the departure was to look for work rather than to begin it, the ordinary tests apply instead, and the year frequently comes out differently from what the traveller assumed.
Visits to India by people of Indian origin are dealt with under rules of their own, which is why a visiting NRI and a foreign national on an identical itinerary can finish the year in different positions. Those rules bear on the second test, the one that pairs a shorter stay in the year with presence in earlier years, so the length of past visits matters as much as this year's. The first question to answer is therefore not how long am I here, but how long have I been here across the recent years, because that is what decides which of the two tests is capable of biting.
Immigration stamps in the passport are the usual starting point, supported by boarding passes, airline records and the tickets themselves. The weakness of stamps alone is that they are sometimes missing, faint or on a passport that has since been replaced, and a count with a gap in it is not a count. A contemporaneous log solves this easily: arrival and departure dates entered as each trip happens, with the travel document reference against each entry. Where the record has to be rebuilt after the event, expect to use several sources together and to note in writing which days rest on inference rather than on a document.
Yes. Each country decides residency under its own law, so one year of travel can satisfy two countries' tests at the same time. Where that happens, a treaty between the two countries may decide which of them treats the person as resident for treaty purposes, using tie breaker criteria rather than a day count. That does not by itself switch off the other country's domestic obligations, and it is not automatic: the position has to be worked out, filed consistently in both places and kept supportable. The day count is still the starting point, because a treaty argument built on a disputed count will not survive examination in either country.
Usually the country you are physically in, because employment income is generally sourced where the work is done, with your residence country taxing it as well if you are resident there and giving credit. Three things follow: your employer may acquire withholding and social security obligations where you sit, a treaty tie-breaker may be needed if both countries call you resident, and a short trip that becomes a long stay can cross a residence threshold nobody was watching. See remote workers and digital nomads.
By facts, not by citizenship or the address on your post. Canada weighs your ties — a home available to you, spouse, dependants, then secondary ties like accounts and licences. The US adds a mechanical day-count test alongside its green-card test. India counts days present under its own thresholds. Where two countries both conclude you are resident, the treaty tie-breaker decides one residence: permanent home, then centre of vital interests, then habitual abode, then nationality. See tax residency.



