Q.Mr. Rakesh Verma, a person of Indian origin now settled abroad, came to India on a visit and stayed for 100 days during the previous year 2025-26. During the four years immediately preceding 2025-26, he had stayed in India for a total of 500 days. Determine his residential status for AY 2026-27.

A visiting person of Indian origin is covered by the same kind of widened threshold as a citizen leaving for employment.

His 100-day visit falls well short of the widened 182-day threshold that applies to a visiting PIO.

Mr. Verma is a person of Indian origin who, being outside India, came on a visit to India during the previous year — exactly the second exception category under Section 6(1). For him, the 60-day limb of Condition (b) is widened to 182 days.

Checking Condition (a): he stayed only 100 days during the previous year, well short of 182 days — fails.

Checking the modified Condition (b): the widened threshold also requires 182 days in the previous year itself — his 100-day stay fails this too, regardless of the unaffected second limb (365 days in the preceding four years).

As a cross-check: his 500 days of stay in the preceding four years comfortably clears the ordinary 365-day requirement, and his 100 days would also have cleared an ORDINARY 60-day threshold — under the unmodified rule he would have been Resident. It is specifically because he is a visiting PIO, and the widened 182-day threshold applies to him, that his short 100-day visit is not enough this year.

Cross-check: applying the unmodified 60-day/365-day Condition (b) would wrongly give Resident status — confirming the PIO-visit exception is the decisive fact in this question.

Assuming that any person of Indian origin who visits India is automatically taxed the same as any other visitor — the WIDENED 182-day threshold specifically targets this category and often changes the outcome compared to an ordinary foreign visitor with no such special exception.