Section 473 Income Tax Act 2025: What Is the Punishment for Violating a Search Order?
Section 473 makes contravention of a specified order during an income-tax search a criminal offence. The Finance Act, 2026 changed the nature of imprisonment to simple imprisonment, while retaining a maximum term of two years and a fine.
What does Section 473 provide?
The operative provision states:
Whoever contravenes any order referred to in section 247(4) shall be punishable with simple imprisonment up to two years and with fine.
Section 473 is the opening offence in Chapter XXII (Offences and Prosecution). The statutory reference to Section 247(4) is essential: not every disagreement during a search automatically amounts to this offence.
What constitutes contravention during a search?
Section 247 deals with search and seizure. Sub-section (4) concerns orders made in the course of search action. Section 473 criminalises contravention of such an order. Whether an offence is established depends on the specific order, its legal basis, the conduct alleged, and the evidence in the case.
What changed under the Finance Act, 2026?
| Issue | Original provision | Position from 1 April 2026 |
|---|---|---|
| Heading | Contravention of order made under Section 247 | Contravention of order made during search action |
| Imprisonment | Rigorous imprisonment up to two years | Simple imprisonment up to two years |
| Fine | Fine also applicable | Fine also applicable |
The amendment was enacted through Section 108 of the Finance Act, 2026. The maximum imprisonment term remains two years; the change concerns its nature.
Practical illustrations
Example 1: Breach of a valid search order
During a lawfully authorised search, an order covered by Section 247(4) is communicated to a person. The person knowingly acts contrary to that order. The authorities may examine whether the facts justify prosecution under Section 473; guilt and punishment require adjudication in accordance with law.
Example 2: Dispute over the scope of an order
A person disputes whether an instruction is an order falling within Section 247(4). The precise written order, statutory power, service or communication and surrounding facts become important. A dispute alone does not establish guilt.
Example 3: Failure to facilitate inspection
A separate failure to provide facilities to inspect books or documents during search is addressed by Section 474. The two provisions should not be treated as interchangeable.
How is prosecution initiated?
Section 473 concerns a criminal offence rather than an administrative penalty. Section 491(1) requires previous sanction from an authority specified in that provision before a person is proceeded against for an offence under Section 473. The prosecution must establish the elements of the offence before the competent court.
Important records may include the search authorisation, the order made under Section 247(4), evidence that the order was communicated, search records and contemporaneous correspondence. A person facing allegations should preserve these materials and obtain advice on the facts and applicable procedural law.
Frequently asked questions
What is the maximum imprisonment under Section 473?
Simple imprisonment for up to two years, together with a fine, under the provision effective from 1 April 2026.
Does the law prescribe a fixed fine?
No fixed rupee amount is stated in Section 473. The competent court determines punishment in accordance with law.
Is Section 473 the same as Section 474?
No. Section 473 concerns contravention of an order referred to in Section 247(4), whereas Section 474 addresses failure to afford inspection facilities during a search.
Is prior sanction required?
Yes. Section 491(1) requires previous sanction from a specified income-tax authority for prosecution under Section 473.
Official statutory references
Last reviewed: 12 November 2026. This article is general legal information and not a substitute for case-specific legal advice.