Section 482 · Offences
Section 482 of the Income-tax Act, 2025 — False Statement in Verification (Prosecution and Punishment)
By CA Rajat Agrawal
Updated 05 Jul 2026
Chapter XXII
📜 What the law says — Section 482, Income-tax Act 2025
482. If a person makes a statement in any verification under this Act or under any
rule made thereunder, or delivers an account or statement which is false,
and which he either knows or believes to be false, or does not believe to be true, he
shall be punishable,—
27
[(a) with simple imprisonment for a term up to two years, or with fine, or
with both, where the amount of tax, which would have been evaded if the
statement or account had been accepted as true, exceeds fifty lakh rupees;
or
(b) with simple imprisonment for a term up to six months, or with fine, or
with both, where the amount of tax, which would have been evaded if the
26. Sections 480 and 481 substituted by the Finance Act, 2026, w.e.f. 1-4-2026. Prior to their
substitution, sections 480 and 481 read as under :
“480. Failure to furnish return of income in search cases.—If a person wilfully fails to furnish
in due time the return of total income which is required to be furnished by notice given under
section 294(1)(a), he shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which shall not be
less than three months but which may extend to three years and with fine.
481. Failure to produce accounts and documents.—If a person wilfully fails to produce, or
cause to be produced, the accounts and documents as are referred to in the notice served
on him under section 268(1) on or before the date specified in such notice, or wilfully fails
to comply with a direction issued to him under section 268(5), he shall be punishable with
rigorous imprisonment for a term which may extend to one year and with fine.”
27. Clauses (a), (b) and (c) substituted for clauses (a) and (b) by the Finance Act, 2026, w.e.f.
1-4-2026. Prior to their substitution, clauses (a) and (b) read as under :
“(a) in a case, where the amount of tax, which would have been evaded if the statement
or account had been accepted as true, exceeds twenty-five lakh rupees, with rigorous
imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than six months but which may
extend to seven years, and with fine;
(b) in any other case, with rigorous imprisonment for a term which shall not be less
than three months but which may extend to two years, and with fine.”
statement or account had been accepted as true, exceeds ten lakh rupees
b
In plain language
What Section 482 says in plain English
Section 482 of the Income-tax Act, 2025 makes it a criminal offence to lie in an income-tax verification or to hand over an account or statement that you know is false. This is not a mere penalty (money) provision — it is a prosecution provision, meaning a conviction can send a person to jail. It is the direct successor to the well-known Section 277 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and the language and structure have been carried forward almost word-for-word into the 2025 Act, which takes effect from 1 April 2026.
The offence is triggered when a person:
- Makes a statement in any verification under the Act or the rules (for example, the verification you sign at the bottom of an income-tax return, an audit report, an appeal form, or an affidavit filed with the department); or
- Delivers an account or statement (books, computations, declarations, certificates) under the Act or rules,
and that statement or account is false, and the person either (a) knows it is false, (b) believes it to be false, or (c) does not believe it to be true. That mental state — the "guilty mind" — is the heart of the section.
Who it applies to
- Any person — individuals, HUFs, partners, directors, and those who sign returns or documents on behalf of a company, firm, trust or society.
- Tax professionals and signatories who verify or certify a statement they know to be untrue can also be exposed.
- It commonly bites alongside willful attempt to evade tax (the 2025 Act successor to Section 276C of the 1961 law) — a bogus deduction claim can attract both charges.
Key conditions and the two-tier punishment
Punishment depends on how much tax would have been evaded had the false statement been accepted. Crucially, actual evasion need not occur — the offence is complete once the false statement is made with the required knowledge.
- Higher slab — tax sought to be evaded exceeds ₹25 lakh: rigorous imprisonment of not less than 6 months, extendable up to 7 years, and fine.
- Ordinary slab — any other case (₹25 lakh or less): rigorous imprisonment of not less than 3 months, extendable up to 2 years, and fine.
Note the words "rigorous" (hard labour) and "not less than" — there is a mandatory minimum jail term, and a fine is compulsory in addition to imprisonment. Courts have limited discretion to go below the minimum except for special and adequate reasons recorded in writing.
How it interacts with related sections
- Culpable mental state is presumed. The 2025 Act (carrying forward Section 278E of the old law) says that in any prosecution requiring a guilty mind, the court shall presume its existence, and the accused must prove absence of such mind beyond reasonable doubt. This flips the usual burden onto the taxpayer.
- Prior sanction is needed. A prosecution cannot be launched by a junior officer — it requires the previous sanction of a senior authority (Principal Commissioner / Commissioner or higher), a safeguard against frivolous cases.
- Overlaps with evasion and falsification offences. A single fraudulent return can attract Section 482 (false verification), the willful-evasion offence, and the falsification-of-books offence together.
- Distinct from monetary penalties. Penalty for under-reporting/mis-reporting (the 2025 successor to Section 270A) is a separate civil consequence; prosecution under Section 482 can run in parallel.
Practical implications for taxpayers
- The verification you tick/sign on your ITR ("I declare that the information given is true and correct") is a legal statement. Signing it while knowing figures are false is exactly what Section 482 targets.
- Honest mistakes are generally not offences — the section needs knowledge or disbelief in truth, not a bona fide error. But because the mental state is presumed, keep documentary proof (bank statements, invoices, professional advice) showing you acted in good faith.
- A conviction is a criminal record with consequences beyond tax — it can affect passports, directorships, loans and professional licences.
💡 Example
Worked example 1 — Higher slab (over ₹25 lakh). Mr. Arun runs a trading business and files a return declaring income of ₹40 lakh, but knowingly claims ₹1.1 crore of fake purchase invoices to reduce taxable income. Had the false statement been accepted, tax of roughly ₹34 lakh would have been evaded. Because the tax sought to be evaded exceeds ₹25 lakh, Section 482 exposes him to rigorous imprisonment of not less than 6 months, up to 7 years, plus fine — even if the Assessing Officer catches the bogus claim during scrutiny and no tax is ultimately lost.
Worked example 2 — Ordinary slab (₹25 lakh or less). Ms. Priya, a salaried employee, files a return with a fabricated ₹6 lakh donation receipt and a false rent claim, knowing both are untrue. The tax that would have been evaded is about ₹1.8 lakh. Since this is under ₹25 lakh, she faces the lower slab: rigorous imprisonment of not less than 3 months, up to 2 years, plus fine, in addition to any mis-reporting penalty.
A short relatable story. Ravi, a small builder, was advised by an over-eager consultant to "add a few extra expense bills" to bring his tax down before signing the return. Ravi signed the verification without reading it closely. Two years later, a survey revealed the bills were fake. In court, Ravi argued he "didn't know," but because Section 482 presumes a guilty mind, the burden fell on him to prove innocence beyond reasonable doubt — a very high bar. His careful records of consultant emails helped, but the case dragged on for years. The lesson: the verification you sign is a sworn statement, and "my accountant did it" is not an easy defence.
| Aspect | Tax sought to be evaded ≤ ₹25 lakh | Tax sought to be evaded > ₹25 lakh |
|---|
| Minimum imprisonment | 3 months (rigorous) | 6 months (rigorous) |
| Maximum imprisonment | 2 years (rigorous) | 7 years (rigorous) |
| Fine | Yes — mandatory, in addition | Yes — mandatory, in addition |
| Actual evasion required? | No — false statement is enough | No — false statement is enough |
| Mental element | Knows/believes false, or does not believe true (presumed by court) | Knows/believes false, or does not believe true (presumed by court) |
| Prior sanction to prosecute | Required (Pr. Commissioner/Commissioner or higher) | Required (Pr. Commissioner/Commissioner or higher) |
| 1961 Act equivalent | Section 277 | Section 277 |
Related sections
Section 277 (1961 Act) — Old provision Section 482 replaces Section 476 — Willful attempt to evade tax (successor to s.276C) Section 483 — Falsification of books of account or documents Section 484 — Abetment of false return or statement Section 489 — Presumption as to culpable mental state Section 270A (1961 Act) — Penalty for under-reporting/mis-reporting income
Frequently asked questions
Does Section 482 apply if the tax officer catches the lie and no tax is actually lost?
Yes. The offence is complete when a false statement is made with the required knowledge. Actual evasion or loss of revenue is not required — the law targets the false statement itself.
Is an honest mistake in my return an offence under Section 482?
Generally no, because the section requires that you knew the statement was false, believed it false, or did not believe it true. A genuine, bona fide error is not covered — but keep evidence, because the court presumes a guilty mind and you must rebut it.
What is the punishment under Section 482?
If the tax sought to be evaded exceeds ₹25 lakh, rigorous imprisonment of 6 months to 7 years plus fine. In any other case, rigorous imprisonment of 3 months to 2 years plus fine. Both jail and fine apply.
Can I be prosecuted just because my accountant filed a wrong figure?
The person who signs the verification is responsible for it. Blaming the consultant is a weak defence because the burden is on you to show you had no guilty knowledge. Choose your signatory and professional carefully and review before signing.
Which section of the old Income-tax Act, 1961 does Section 482 correspond to?
Section 482 of the 2025 Act is the successor to Section 277 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The wording, mental-element test and the ₹25 lakh two-tier punishment structure have been carried forward.
Can the department launch prosecution on its own without approval?
No. Prosecution requires the prior sanction of a senior authority — a Principal Commissioner/Commissioner or higher rank — which acts as a safeguard against frivolous or arbitrary cases.
Can I face both a penalty and prosecution for the same false claim?
Yes. A monetary penalty for mis-reporting income (successor to Section 270A) is a civil consequence and can run in parallel with criminal prosecution under Section 482 for the false statement.
C
CA Rajat Agrawal
Chartered Accountant, EaseValue · Reviewed 05 Jul 2026
This explainer is prepared and reviewed by EaseValue's tax team, based on the text of the Income-tax Act, 2025 (as amended by the Finance Act, 2026).
Disclaimer: This page explains the law in general terms for education and is not professional advice. The Income-tax Act, 2025 takes effect from 1 April 2026; provisions, thresholds and interpretations may change. Please confirm your specific position with our team before acting.
💬 Discussion & questions
0 comments · Ask anything about this — a Chartered Accountant or the community will reply.
Have a doubt about this (Section 482)? Ask here 👇
Free · takes 20 seconds · our CA answers. No account needed.
No comments yet — be the first to ask. 👆
EaseValue