Section 257 of the Income-tax Act, 2025 — Proceedings Before Income-tax Authorities Deemed Judicial Proceedings

In plain language

What Section 257 says in plain English

Section 257 of the Income-tax Act, 2025 gives a special legal status to any proceeding that takes place before an income-tax authority — an assessment, a scrutiny hearing, a survey, a summons hearing, an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals), a penalty hearing, and so on. It says that such a proceeding is "deemed to be a judicial proceeding". In simple words, when you sit across an Assessing Officer or answer questions on oath, the law treats that room like a courtroom for certain limited purposes.

The section has two limbs:

• Sub-section (1): Any proceeding under the Act before an income-tax authority is deemed to be a judicial proceeding within the meaning of sections 229 and 267, and for the purposes of section 233, of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS) — the new criminal code that has replaced the old Indian Penal Code, 1860.
• Sub-section (2): Every income-tax authority is deemed to be a Civil Court for the purposes of section 215 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) — the new procedure code replacing the CrPC — but NOT for the purposes of Chapter XXVIII of the BNSS.

Why this matters — the real consequences

The deeming has three practical effects for anyone dealing with the tax department:

• You must tell the truth on oath. Because the hearing is a "judicial proceeding", giving false evidence or a false statement can attract prosecution for perjury / giving false evidence (BNS section 229, the successor to IPC section 193). Lying to save tax is not just a tax problem — it becomes a criminal offence.
• Contempt-type conduct is punishable. Insulting or intentionally interrupting the officer during the proceeding can be caught by the offences the section pulls in, protecting the dignity of the proceeding just like in a court.
• Prosecution can only start on the authority's complaint. Section 233 of the BNS (successor to IPC section 195) means a court cannot take cognizance of such an offence unless the income-tax authority itself files a written complaint. This is a safeguard — a random third party cannot drag you into a perjury case; the officer before whom the alleged lie was told must initiate it.

Who it applies to

• Taxpayers and their representatives — individuals, HUFs, firms, companies, and the CAs, advocates or authorised representatives who appear on their behalf.
• Witnesses and third parties summoned under section 246 (power to summon and examine on oath, the 2025 successor to section 131 of the 1961 Act).
• The income-tax authorities themselves — Assessing Officers, Commissioners (Appeals), Joint/Additional Commissioners, and other authorities exercising powers under the Act.

The Civil Court designation and the Chapter XXVIII carve-out

Sub-section (2) treats the officer as a Civil Court only for the limited purpose of BNSS section 215 — which governs who can complain about offences against public justice. The Act then expressly excludes Chapter XXVIII of the BNSS. This carve-out is deliberate: it means an income-tax authority is not a full-fledged Civil Court that can, for example, transfer or commit cases the way a real court can. The authority gets the "truth-enforcing" powers of a court but not the general judicial machinery. This exact structure was carried forward from the 1961 Act, where Section 136 excluded the corresponding Chapter XXVI of the old CrPC, 1973.

How it interacts with related sections

• Section 246 (summons and examination on oath): the power to record sworn statements is what makes Section 257 bite — a sworn false statement becomes perjury.
• Section 247 (survey): statements recorded during a survey feed into proceedings that Section 257 protects.
• Penalty and prosecution chapters: Section 257 supports the integrity of the record on which penalties and prosecutions are later built.

Practical takeaway

Section 257 is a "background" administrative provision — there is no rate, no threshold and no rupee limit to compute. Its message is simple but serious: a tax hearing is not a casual conversation. Every reply you give on oath, every document you certify as genuine, and every figure you confirm before an officer carries the same legal weight as testimony in court. Answer accurately, keep records, and if unsure, say so rather than guess or misstate.