Section 489 Presumption as to assets, books of account, etc., in certain cases

Income-tax Act, 2025

At a Glance

This commentary compares Clause 489 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 (Old Version) with Section 489 of the Income-tax Act, 2025 as presented in the supplied documents and provides a statutory-provision analysis of the enacted provision. Both texts address presumptions relating to assets, books of account and related material found in searches u/s 247 and custody u/s 248. The principal change between the Bill and the Act is the explicit inclusion in the Act of "any information in electronic form" and "computer system" (with cross-references to definitions in section 261). The provisions affect taxpayers, investigators/prosecution and custodial officers; the effective date or enactment date is Not stated in the document.

Background & Scope

Statutory hooks: the provision is located under the chapter/heading "OFFENCES AND PROSECUTION" and operates in relation to searches made u/s 247 and custody/delivery u/s 248. The Act version expressly cross-refers to definitions in section 261 (sub-sections 261(e) and 261(g)), thereby importing statutory meanings for "computer system" and "information in electronic form." The Bill (Old Version) contains materially similar language but omits the phrases expressly covering electronic information and computer systems in both sub-sections. No further definitions or extended explanations are provided in either document beyond those cross-references. Not stated in the document: effective date, legislative intent beyond wording, parliamentary debates, or any transitional arrangements.

Statutory Provision Mode

Text & Scope

Section 489 (Act) prescribes that where, in a search u/s 247, certain assets (expressly including money, bullion, jewellery, virtual digit assets or other valuable articles or things), books of account, other documents, or any information in electronic form or on a computer system (or any computer system containing such information) are found in the possession or control of any person and tendered by the prosecution in evidence against that person (or that person together with the person referred to in section 484) for an offence under the Act, the provisions of section 247(7) shall, so far as may be, apply in relation to those items. Sub-section (2) mirrors this structure for assets, books or documents (and in the Act, electronic information/computer systems) taken into custody u/s 248 and delivered to the requisitioning officer u/s 248(2), again triggering the application of section 247(7) where such items are tendered in evidence.

Coverage: the provision applies to (a) items found during search u/s 247 and (b) items taken into custody u/s 248 and subsequently delivered to the requisitioning officer. The operative trigger is tendering by the prosecution in evidence for an offence under the Income-tax Act.

Interpretation

The text signals legislative intent to extend the evidentiary/presumptive machinery of section 247(7) beyond physical assets and paper records to specified digital material and whole computer systems by explicit inclusion and cross-reference to section 261 definitions. The phrase "so far as may be, apply" indicates a measure of adaptation: the provisions of section 247(7) are to be applied to such items to the extent practicable, accommodating differences between physical and electronic evidence. The use of statutory definitions (section 261) suggests an intent for consistency in meaning across the statute.

Exceptions/Provisos

Not stated in the document: any express exceptions or provisos in Section 489 other than the qualifying phrase "so far as may be, apply." No thresholds, limitation periods, or carve-outs are specified in the provision as set out. Not stated in the document: procedures for challenging the application of the presumption, standard of proof adjustments, or evidentiary safeguards specific to electronic materials beyond the adaptation phrase.

Illustrations

• Illustration 1 (search): During a lawful search u/s 247, an officer finds a laptop containing financial ledgers and e-wallet records. The prosecution tenders the laptop and the electronic records in evidence for an offence. u/s 489(1) (Act), the provisions of section 247(7) shall, so far as may be, apply to the laptop and the electronic information contained therein - thereby invoking the statutory presumption framework applicable to seized materials.
• Illustration 2 (custody and delivery): A mobile phone and external drive containing cryptocurrency wallet keys are taken into custody u/s 248 and later delivered to the requisitioning officer. If those items are tendered by the prosecution in evidence, Section 489(2) (Act) brings them within the scope of section 247(7) as adapted to electronic devices and information.
• Illustration 3 (Bill contrast): The Bill (Old Version) would clearly reach the physical devices and virtual digit assets named, but because it omits "information in electronic form" and "computer system" it is less explicit about applying section 247(7) to, for example, intangible datasets or the integrity of entire computer systems; such items might have been less clearly covered under the Bill text.

Interplay

Section 489 expressly makes the application of section 247(7) contingent on items being tendered by the prosecution for an offence under the Act and applies "so far as may be." It cross-references section 247 (search provisions), section 248 (custody and requisitioning), section 261 (definitions for electronic material and computer systems) and section 484 (a person referenced in conjunction with offences). Not stated in the document: any rules, notifications or circulars implementing procedural steps for electronic evidence handling under these specific sections. The text itself anticipates interactions with the broader search/custody/evidence regime (section 247/248 and definitions in section 261) but leaves specifics to other provisions or procedural law. Potential interpretive issue arises from the adaptation clause ("so far as may be") when applying provisions designed for physical documents to electronic systems - e.g., how to treat hash values, forensic images, or access credentials u/s 247(7) is not spelled out in this provision.

Differences Between the Bill (Old Version) and the Act (Section 489)

• Inclusion of electronic information and computer systems: The Act adds the phrases "or any information in electronic form as defined in section 261(g) or on a computer system as defined in section 261(e) or any computer system containing the said information" in sub-section (1), and similarly expands the list in sub-section (2). The Bill text lacks these phrases.
• Scope of objects covered: Both texts list "money, bullion, jewellery, virtual digit asset or other valuable article or thing" and "books of account or other documents." The Bill includes "virtual digit asset" in sub-section (1) (as does the Act), so the notable addition in the Act is solely the electronic information/computer system wording.
• Cross-referencing to definitions: The Act explicitly ties the added electronic phrases to section 261(e) and 261(g); the Bill contains no such cross-reference because it omits the electronic material entirely.

Practical impact of each change (summary): inclusion of "information in electronic form" and "computer system" broadens the statutory presumption to electronic evidence and whole systems; it clarifies that digital records, data stores and devices may attract the same prosecutorial evidentiary presumption under the regime that governs physical assets and documents. This increases the scope of materials against which the prosecution may invoke the protective presumption in section 247(7) (as applied), affects procedures for custodial delivery and handling, and raises compliance and forensic-evidence considerations for taxpayers and investigating officers. No other substantive changes are shown in the text.

Practical Implications

• Compliance and risk areas: The Act's inclusion of electronic information and computer systems broadens the materials against which the statutory presumption may operate; taxpayers should be aware that digital records and devices found in searches or taken into custody may attract the same evidentiary presumptions as physical books and documents. Investigating officers/prosecution must consider forensic integrity and chain-of-custody procedures when invoking section 247(7) in respect of electronic items.
• Record-keeping/evidence points: The statutory cross-reference to section 261 suggests that accurate identification, documentation and preservation of electronic information and computer systems consistent with the definitions will be material. Notes, inventories, forensic imaging records, access logs, and delivery receipts will be relevant in applying "so far as may be" adaptations and in meeting any later challenge to admissibility or weight.
• Operational impact for officers: Custody/delivery u/s 248 will now commonly involve devices and systems; authorities will need procedures for secure transfer and retention, ensuring that the requisitioning officer receives and can tender electronic materials in a manner compatible with evidentiary rules.

Key Takeaways

• Section 489 extends the presumption mechanism (section 247(7)) to materials found in searches or delivered in custody, triggered when the prosecution tenders such materials in evidence for an offence under the Act.
• The Act expands the scope to include "information in electronic form" and "computer system" (defined in section 261), a material addition absent from the Bill (Old Version).
• The phrase "so far as may be, apply" signals adaptation of section 247(7) to electronic items but leaves practical details to interpretation and other procedural provisions.
• Taxpayers and practitioners should note increased exposure of digital records to presumptions; investigators must maintain forensic and chain-of-custody standards when dealing with electronic evidence.
• The provision cross-links to sections 247, 248, 261 and 484; however, procedural specifics and safeguards for electronic evidence are Not stated in the document.

---

Full Text:

Section 489 Presumption as to assets, books of account, etc., in certain cases

Presumption as to assets extended to electronic information and computer systems when tendered as prosecutorial evidence. The statute extends the evidentiary presumption applicable to assets, books of account and documents found in searches or taken into custody to include information in electronic form and computer systems, applying the presumptive framework when such items are tendered in evidence and qualifying that application by the phrase 'so far as may be, apply'; the Act cross-references statutory definitions for electronic information and computer systems to ensure consistent meaning.