Section 276AB — Failure to comply with the provisions of sections 269UC, 269UE and 269UL
Case Laws & Commentary — Income-tax Act, 1961 (as amended by the Finance Act, 2026) — bharattax.co Treatise
Status: Live in form but DORMANT — second proviso bars initiation on or after 1 April 2022; the underlying Chapter XX-C sunset on 1 July 2002.
Finance Act, 2026: Not amended by the Finance Act, 2026.
Mechanism: Penalises failure to comply with the Chapter XX-C pre-emptive-purchase code — the statement under s.269UC, surrender of possession under s.269UE(2), and the no-objection requirement under s.269UL(2).
Litigation profile: Sparse — no live application; tied to the spent Chapter XX-C.
A. COMMENTARY
Scheme — the criminal sanction of Chapter XX-C
Section 276AB was the penal enforcement of Chapter XX-C (purchase by the Central Government of immovable property in certain cases of transfer). It punished a person who failed to comply with section 269UC (the statement of agreement for transfer in the prescribed form), or failed to surrender or deliver possession of property purchased by the Central Government under section 269UE(2), or contravened section 269UL(2) (the requirement of a 'no objection certificate' before registration). It carried rigorous imprisonment of up to two years and fine, with a six-month minimum absent special and adequate reasons.
Why it is dormant
Chapter XX-C does not apply to any transfer effected on or after 1 July 2002 (section 269UP), so the substantive obligations that section 276AB enforced have had no operation for over two decades. The provision was, in any event, closed for fresh prosecutions by its second proviso: 'no proceeding under this section shall be initiated on or after the 1st day of April, 2022.' Section 276AB is therefore a dead letter for practical purposes — reproduced here for completeness, with its sunset clearly flagged.
B. STATUTORY TEXT (verbatim — pre-Finance Act, 2026 text)
Text reproduced verbatim from the bare Act; not amended by the Finance Act, 2026. Note the second proviso barring initiation on or after 1 April 2022 and the sunset of Chapter XX-C from 1 July 2002.
Failure to comply with the provisions of sections 269UC, 269UE and 269UL.
276AB. Whoever fails to comply with the provisions of section 269UC or fails to surrender or deliver possession of the property under sub-section (2) of section 269UE or contravenes the provisions of sub-section (2) of section 269UL shall be punishable with rigorous imprisonment for a term which may extend to two years and shall also be liable to fine :
Provided that in the absence of special and adequate reasons to the contrary to be recorded in the judgment of the court, such imprisonment shall not be for less than six months:
Provided further that no proceeding under this section shall be initiated on or after the 1st day of April, 2022.
C. AUTHORITIES
There is no reported merits prosecution under section 276AB (candour rule). It is understood through the Chapter XX-C pre-emptive-purchase jurisprudence, where the constitutional and procedural battles were fought.
These decisions construe the Chapter XX-C obligations whose breach section 276AB penalised; they are collected in full in the Treatise's Chapter XX-C volume.
C.B. Gautam v. Union of India (1993) 199 ITR 530 (SC)
Court/Year Supreme Court, 1992/1993.
Holding Read into Chapter XX-C a mandatory requirement of a reasonable opportunity (natural justice) before a pre-emptive purchase order; the leading constitutional decision on the scheme section 276AB enforced.
Appropriate Authority v. Sudha Patil (1998) 235 ITR 118 (SC)
Court/Year Supreme Court, 1998.
Holding Nature and limits of the appropriate authority's pre-emptive purchase power under Chapter XX-C — context for the compliance obligations under sections 269UC/269UE/269UL.
CHAPTER XXII — OFFENCES AND PROSECUTIONS
Section 276AB — Failure to comply with the provisions of sections 269UC, 269UE and 269UL
Case Laws & Commentary — Income-tax Act, 1961 (as amended by the Finance Act, 2026) — bharattax.co Treatise
Status: Live in form but DORMANT — second proviso bars initiation on or after 1 April 2022; the underlying Chapter XX-C sunset on 1 July 2002.
Finance Act, 2026: Not amended by the Finance Act, 2026.
Mechanism: Penalises failure to comply with the Chapter XX-C pre-emptive-purchase code — the statement under s.269UC, surrender of possession under s.269UE(2), and the no-objection requirement under s.269UL(2).
Litigation profile: Sparse — no live application; tied to the spent Chapter XX-C.
A. COMMENTARY
Scheme — the criminal sanction of Chapter XX-C
Section 276AB was the penal enforcement of Chapter XX-C (purchase by the Central Government of immovable property in certain cases of transfer). It punished a person who failed to comply with section 269UC (the statement of agreement for transfer in the prescribed form), or failed to surrender or deliver possession of property purchased by the Central Government under section 269UE(2), or contravened section 269UL(2) (the requirement of a 'no objection certificate' before registration). It carried rigorous imprisonment of up to two years and fine, with a six-month minimum absent special and adequate reasons.
Why it is dormant
Chapter XX-C does not apply to any transfer effected on or after 1 July 2002 (section 269UP), so the substantive obligations that section 276AB enforced have had no operation for over two decades. The provision was, in any event, closed for fresh prosecutions by its second proviso: 'no proceeding under this section shall be initiated on or after the 1st day of April, 2022.' Section 276AB is therefore a dead letter for practical purposes — reproduced here for completeness, with its sunset clearly flagged.
B. STATUTORY TEXT (verbatim — pre-Finance Act, 2026 text)
Text reproduced verbatim from the bare Act; not amended by the Finance Act, 2026. Note the second proviso barring initiation on or after 1 April 2022 and the sunset of Chapter XX-C from 1 July 2002.
Failure to comply with the provisions of sections 269UC, 269UE and 269UL.
276AB. Whoever fails to comply with the provisions of section 269UC or fails to surrender or deliver possession of the property under sub-section (2) of section 269UE or contravenes the provisions of sub-section (2) of section 269UL shall be punishable with rigorous imprisonment for a term which may extend to two years and shall also be liable to fine :
Provided that in the absence of special and adequate reasons to the contrary to be recorded in the judgment of the court, such imprisonment shall not be for less than six months:
Provided further that no proceeding under this section shall be initiated on or after the 1st day of April, 2022.
C. AUTHORITIES
There is no reported merits prosecution under section 276AB (candour rule). It is understood through the Chapter XX-C pre-emptive-purchase jurisprudence, where the constitutional and procedural battles were fought.
Cognate authority — Chapter XX-C pre-emptive purchase
These decisions construe the Chapter XX-C obligations whose breach section 276AB penalised; they are collected in full in the Treatise's Chapter XX-C volume.
C.B. Gautam v. Union of India (1993) 199 ITR 530 (SC)
Court/Year Supreme Court, 1992/1993.
Holding Read into Chapter XX-C a mandatory requirement of a reasonable opportunity (natural justice) before a pre-emptive purchase order; the leading constitutional decision on the scheme section 276AB enforced.
Appropriate Authority v. Sudha Patil (1998) 235 ITR 118 (SC)
Court/Year Supreme Court, 1998.
Holding Nature and limits of the appropriate authority's pre-emptive purchase power under Chapter XX-C — context for the compliance obligations under sections 269UC/269UE/269UL.