Comparison of section 251 "Copying, extraction, retention and release of books of account and documents seized or requisitioned." between the Income-Tax Act, 2025 (as passed) and the Income-Tax Bill, 2025 (as originally introduced)

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....oned under clauses 247 and 248 of the Bill. It matters for taxpayers whose records are seized and for tax authorities conducting searches/requisitions. Effective date: Not stated in the document. Background & Scope Statutory hooks: Clause 251 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 (Old Version) operates in the context of clauses 247 and 248 which empower authorised officers to seize or requisition assets, books, documents, electronic media or computer systems. The clause addresses transmission of seized material to the territorial Assessing Officer where the seizing officer lacks jurisdiction, the right of the person from whom material was seized to make copies or extracts, retention limits for authorities, and an objection mechanism to the Board. ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..../Provisos No express exceptions or detailed provisos (for example, for ongoing criminal investigations, national security, or preservation of evidence) are stated in the clause. Not stated in the document. Illustrations * Example 1: A taxpayer's computer hard drive is seized by an authorised officer not having territorial jurisdiction; per Clause 251(1), the officer must handover the seized computer to the Assessing Officer having jurisdiction, and that Assessing Officer will exercise powers under sub-sections (2) to (4). (Facts drawn solely from clause wording.) * Example 2: After seizure, the taxpayer applies to make copies of accounting records; the authorised officer or Assessing Officer must permit copying/extraction at an ap....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d to in section 247(1) has no jurisdiction over the person referred to in section 247(1)(a) or (b)," and requires handing over assets/material to the Assessing Officer within 180 days from search/requisition; the Assessing Officer then exercises powers under sub-sections (2) and (3). * Practical impact: The Act expands the cross-reference (247(1) generally, and explicitly includes 247(1)(a) & (b)) and adds a 180-day temporal requirement for handover. This narrows discretion to delay handover and creates a clear timeline, increasing predictability for taxpayers and officers. The change also alters which sub-sections the receiving Assessing Officer will apply (Act: (2) & (3); Bill: (2) to (4)), potentially changing procedural detail applied....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....m the end of the quarter in which the order of assessment or reassessment or recomputation is made;" clause (b) allows longer retention after reasons and approval. - Act: Section 251(3)(a) permits retention "up to one month from the end of the quarter in which the order of assessment or reassessment or recomputation is made u/s 270(10) or section 271 or section 279 or section 294(1)(c);" clause (b) similar but requires approval from approving authority. * Practical impact: The Act adds specific cross-references to assessment provisions (ss. 270(10), 271, 279, 294(1)(c)), thereby linking retention timelines to particular finalisation events. This provides clearer legal triggers for retention calculations, reducing ambiguity about which ord....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ers to demand transfer, reducing potential administrative delays and forum-shopping between officers. Practical Implications * Compliance and risk areas: Tax authorities must ensure procedural fairness by scheduling appointed times/places and providing an empowered person to supervise copying/extraction. Failure to allow copies or to follow retention limits could attract administrative objections to the Board. Officers must document reasons in writing before seeking approval for extended retention. * Record-keeping/evidence points: The clause implicitly requires written reasons for extended retention and an approving authority's sanction; therefore, contemporaneous documentation (records of handover, entries showing the appointment....