Income Tax — New Act 2025

Prosecution Provisions Under Income-tax Act 2025 Explained: Rules, Limits and Worked Examples

By Finin2min Research DeskP1 — High PullUpdated June 2026New Act
✅ Verified: Income-tax Act 2025 Chapter XVII (Sections 430–455) | CBDT Prosecution Guidelines 2019 | incometax.gov.in

Penalty is a civil remedy — prosecution is a criminal one. Under the Income-tax Act 2025, prosecution can result in imprisonment and fine, not just a monetary penalty. While prosecutions are relatively rare in practice, the risk is real for serious defaults — failure to pay deducted TDS, wilful evasion, fraudulent returns, and fabrication of accounts. This guide explains every prosecution section in the new Act, the threshold for prosecution versus penalty, compounding options, and what proactive steps eliminate prosecution risk entirely.

Use the Income Tax CalculatorModel the tax impact alongside this guide.
Open Calculator

Prosecution vs Penalty — The Critical Distinction

The income tax system uses both penalty and prosecution for different levels of default:

ParameterPenaltyProsecution
NatureCivil — monetaryCriminal — imprisonment + fine
Who decidesAssessing Officer / CIT(A)Court of Magistrate
Standard of proofBalance of probabilitiesBeyond reasonable doubt
Can both apply?Yes — both can be imposed on same defaultYes — prosecution + penalty simultaneously
CompoundingNot applicableAvailable — pay fee to close case
BailNot applicableAvailable for most IT offences

Key Prosecution Sections — Old to New Act Mapping

OffenceOld SectionNew SectionPunishment
Wilful failure to furnish return276CCSection 4373 months–2 years imprisonment + fine
Wilful failure to pay TDS to government276BSection 4303 months–7 years imprisonment + fine
Wilful attempt to evade tax276C(1)Section 4366 months–7 years + fine (if tax >₹25L); else 3 months–3 years
Wilful attempt to evade — false statement277Section 4416 months–7 years imprisonment
Fabrication of accounts277ASection 4423 months–3 years imprisonment
Abetment of false return278Section 443Same as principal offender
Failure to pay advance tax (>25% of liability)276C(2)Section 436(2)3 months–2 years imprisonment
🚨
TDS Non-deposit is the Most Prosecuted Offence: Section 430 (old Section 276B) — failure to deposit TDS deducted from employees or vendors within the prescribed time — has the highest prosecution rate. Directors and CFOs of companies have been prosecuted personally. If TDS is deducted but not deposited, prosecution can proceed even if the company later pays.

Case Study: Director Prosecution for TDS Default — Section 430

Manufacturing SME, Pune — FY 2022-23 TDS Default

Rajan Sharma was the Director (Finance) of a ₹12-crore turnover manufacturing company. During a cash-crunch period, the company deducted ₹8.4 lakh in employee salary TDS (Section 192) but deposited only ₹2.1 lakh. The balance ₹6.3 lakh remained unpaid for 14 months. A complaint under Section 276B (old Act) was filed against the company and Rajan personally.

TDS Not Deposited
₹6.3 lakh
Risk
Up to 7 years imprisonment

Rajan and the company applied for compounding of offence — paid the TDS amount + 24% p.a. interest + compounding fee of ₹1.89 lakh (3% of TDS per month of delay). The prosecution complaint was withdrawn after compounding was accepted by the Principal CCIT.

Lesson: Always deposit TDS on time — even if you can't pay other dues. TDS collected from employees is a trust money of the government, not the company's working capital.

Compounding of Offences — The Escape Route

Most income tax prosecutions can be "compounded" — settled by paying a compounding fee, which results in the criminal complaint being withdrawn. Key rules under Section 455 of the new Act (old Section 279):

When Prosecution Is NOT Launched — CBDT Guidelines

The CBDT Prosecution Guidelines 2019 (still applicable under the new Act) prescribe thresholds below which prosecution is generally not initiated:

Prevention Is Better Than Compounding

  • Deposit TDS by 7th of following month — no exceptions, even in cash crunch
  • File ITR by due date — late filing after notice triggers prosecution risk
  • Never fabricate or misrepresent books — Section 442 (fabrication) has no good-faith defence
  • If you've missed TDS deposit: pay immediately, file correction statement, and keep evidence
  • If prosecution notice received: engage a tax advocate immediately and apply for compounding
  • Directors can be personally liable — ensure company-level TDS compliance is tracked monthly

Frequently Asked Questions

Yes. Under Section 430 read with Section 449 of the new Act (old Section 278B), every person who was in charge of and responsible for the conduct of the company's business at the time of the offence can be prosecuted personally, along with the company. This includes Managing Directors, Finance Directors, and CFOs. The individual can escape liability only if they prove that the default occurred without their knowledge or despite reasonable due diligence.
For prosecution under Section 430 (TDS not deposited), the compounding fee is typically 3% of the TDS amount per month of delay (subject to minimum and maximum caps per CBDT guidelines), plus the full TDS amount with interest at 18% p.a. The application is made to the Principal CCIT, and the prosecution complaint is withdrawn after the compounding fee is paid and accepted.