Section 476 Failure to pay tax to credit of Central Government under Chapter XIX-B.

Income-tax Act, 2025

At a Glance

This document set presents two versions of Clause/Section 476 dealing with failure to pay tax to the credit of the Central Government under Chapter XIX-B of the Income-tax enactment of 2025: (a) Clause 476 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 (Old Version); and (b) Section 476 as appearing in the Income-tax Act, 2025 (final or later text on the cited source). The provision creates a penal offence for failure to remit withholding or other specified taxes to the Central Government. It affects persons required to deduct or ensure payment of tax under Chapter XIX-B and linked notes to section 393; fines and imprisonment are prescribed. Effective date or commencement is Not stated in the document.

Background & Scope

Statutory hooks: Chapter XIX-B of the Income-tax law, section 393 (Table and associated Notes), and section 397(3)(b) (relating to filing of statements) are expressly referenced. The provision falls under the OFFENCES AND PROSECUTION chapter of the Income-tax enactment. The clause defines a penal offence for (a) failure to pay tax deducted at source to the Central Government; and (b) failure to pay or ensure payment of tax required under certain Notes to the Table in section 393. The text does not supply the content of the referenced Notes, nor does it supply definitions beyond the immediate wording of the offence. Any further definitions or explanations of 'pay', 'ensure payment', 'credit to the Central Government', or the contents of Chapter XIX-B are Not stated in the document.

Statutory Provision Mode

Text & Scope

The provision (both versions) comprises two sub-sections.

• Sub-section (1): Creates criminal liability where a person fails to - (a) pay the tax deducted at source by him to the credit of the Central Government as required under Chapter XIX-B; or (b) pay tax or ensure payment of tax to the credit of the Central Government as required under certain Notes to section 393 (the Note reference differs between versions). The penal consequences are rigorous imprisonment for not less than three months and up to seven years, and a fine.
• Sub-section (2): Provides a statutory exception: the section shall not apply if the payment referred to in sub-section (1)(a) has been made/credited to the Central Government on or before the time prescribed for filing the statement u/s 397(3)(b) in respect of such payment.
• Scope: The offence targets default in remitting taxes that have been deducted at source or where there is a statutory obligation to pay/ensure payment as provided by notes to section 393. The provision applies to 'a person' who is under the statutory obligation - the text in the documents does not limit the class of person beyond that description.

Interpretation

The text indicates a strict penal approach: failure to transfer collected/deducted tax to government coffers attracts incarceration (minimum three months) and fine, subject to the narrow temporal safe harbour in sub-section (2). The presence of the exception tied to the time prescribed for filing a statement u/s 397(3)(b) suggests legislative intent to avoid penalising technical delays where payment is credited before the statutory filing deadline. The provision's structure separates the act of deduction/collection (the legal duty) from the act of remittance to the government - criminality attaches to failure to remit despite deduction or statutory duty to ensure payment.

Exceptions/Provisos

One proviso-equivalent is present in sub-section (2): the penal provision does not apply if the relevant payment has been made/credited to the Central Government on or before the time prescribed for filing the statement u/s 397(3)(b). The exact temporal relationship and the definition of 'time prescribed for filing the statement' are not further elaborated in the texts provided. Any other exceptions, mitigation, or mens rea requirements are Not stated in the document.

Illustrations

• Example 1: A person deducts tax at source under Chapter XIX-B but does not remit the deducted amount to the Central Government. If the amount remains unpaid past the filing time for the statement u/s 397(3)(b), that person may be prosecutable u/s 476. (Specifics of timing and amount are Not stated in the document.)
• Example 2: A person required by a Note to section 393 to ensure payment of a particular tax fails to ensure payment to the Central Government. Such failure could attract the penal consequences prescribed. (Exact Note content and applicability are Not stated in the document.)

Interplay

The provision expressly references Chapter XIX-B, the Table in section 393 and its Notes, and section 397(3)(b). The text supplied does not include or reproduce those provisions, so the nature of interaction - for example whether other sections provide civil recovery, interest, or additional penalties - is Not stated in the document. The exception in sub-section (2) directly ties the criminal bar to the procedural timeline u/s 397(3)(b), suggesting coordination between filing requirements and criminal liability, but detailed interplay is not set out in the provided text.

Differences between Section 476 (Income-tax Act, 2025) and Clause 476 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 (Old Version)

Observed textual differences between the Clause 476 (Old Version) and Section 476 (as in the later source) are limited and primarily editorial, with one noteworthy cross-reference change:

• Reference to Notes in section 393(3) - sub-clause (b)(i): Old Version (Clause 476) refers to "Note 3 in Table in section 393(3)"; the later Section 476 refers to "Note 2 below the Table in section 393(3)".
  • Practical impact: The change alters which specific Note in the Table is made the basis for penal liability. The substantive effect depends entirely on the substantive content of Note 2 versus Note 3 - neither Note's content nor the reason for the renumbering is provided here. Therefore, any concrete assessment of scope expansion or contraction is Not stated in the document.
• Wording of penal consequence: Old Version states the offender "shall be punishable ... and shall also be liable to fine." Final text states "and with fine."
  • Practical impact: This is stylistic; both expressions impose a fine in addition to imprisonment. There is no indication in the documents that the mensuration or nature of the fine has changed. Therefore, practical impact is minimal and editorial only.
• Sub-section (2) wording and ordering: Old Version says "has been credited to the Central Government on or before the time prescribed for filing the statement for such payment u/s 397(3)(b)." Final text says "has been made to the credit of the Central Government on or before the time prescribed for filing the statement u/s 397(3)(b) in respect of such payment."
  • Practical impact: This is a drafting refinement clarifying the temporal qualification relates to the filing time "in respect of such payment." Neither text changes the substance of the temporal safe harbour materially as presented; precise legal effect may depend on interpretation in context, which is Not stated in the document.

Practical Implications

• Compliance and risk areas: Persons responsible for deducting tax under Chapter XIX-B or for ensuring payment under the referenced Notes to section 393 face criminal exposure (minimum three months' rigorous imprisonment and fine) where remittance to the Central Government is not accomplished within the safe-harbour timeline. The provision places emphasis on timely remittance to avoid penal consequences.
• Record-keeping/evidence: Given the exception in sub-section (2), maintaining contemporaneous records showing date of remittance, bank credits to the Central Government, and the timetable for filing the relevant statements u/s 397(3)(b) will be critical to demonstrate compliance. The text does not prescribe specific forms or evidence; these are Not stated in the document.

Key Takeaways

• Section/Clause 476 creates a criminal offence for failing to remit taxes to the Central Government where required under Chapter XIX-B and specified Notes to section 393.
• Penalty is rigorous imprisonment (three months to seven years) plus fine; the text offers a narrow temporal exception tied to the filing time u/s 397(3)(b).
• The principal substantive difference between the Bill (old) and the later Act text is the cross-reference change from Note 3 to Note 2 in section 393(3); the practical effect of that change is dependent on the content of those Notes, which is Not stated in the document.
• Other differences are drafting and stylistic; no change to prison term or the fact of a fine is evident from the texts provided.
• Stakeholders should ensure timely remittance and retain evidence of credit to the Central Government and the filing timeline u/s 397(3)(b); the documents do not prescribe forms, procedures, or further mitigatory mechanisms.

Full Text:

Section 476 Failure to pay tax to credit of Central Government under Chapter XIX-B.