Income Tax Search 2026: Access Codes and Virtual Digital Space

From 1 April 2026 an income-tax search in India can reach your email server, your social media account and your online trading account, and where the access code is not available the officer conducting it may lawfully override it. That power is not written where almost everyone looks for it. The route to it runs through two sections, not one, and the words that do the work sit in a definitions clause fourteen sections later.

The Income-tax Act, 2025 is Act No. 30 of 2025. It received the assent of the President on 21 August 2025 and was published the same day in the Gazette of India Extraordinary, Part II Section 1, No. 35. Section 1(3) provides that save as otherwise provided in the Act, it shall come into force on the 1st April, 2026. This page sets out what section 247 actually says, where the phrase virtual digital space comes from, the limits the statute writes into the power, and what you can and cannot obtain from the tax department under the Right to Information Act, 2005.

Nothing in section 247 mentions email, social media or a bank login. The reach is built in three steps.

1. Section 247(1)(iii) empowers the authorised officer to “break open the lock of any door, box, locker, safe, almirah, or other receptacle or override the access code to any computer system for exercising the powers conferred by clause (i) where the keys thereof are, or the access to such building, place, etc., or the access code to such computer system, as the case may be, is not available”.
2. Section 261(e) defines computer system to mean “computers, computer networks, computer resources, communication devices, digital or electronic data storage devices, used on stand-alone mode or part of a computer system, linked through a network, or utilised through intermediaries for information creation or processing or storage or exchange, and includes the remote server or cloud server or virtual digital space”.
3. Section 261(j) then defines virtual digital space, and its inclusive list is what everyone is really arguing about.

Section 261(j) defines virtual digital space as “an environment, area or realm, that is constructed and experienced through computer technology and not the physical, tangible world which encompasses any digital realm that allows users to interact, communicate and perform activities using computer systems, computer networks, computer resources, communication devices, cyberspace, internet, worldwide web and emerging technologies, using data and information in the electronic form for creation or storage or exchange”. It then says the term includes seven things:

1. email servers
2. social media account
3. online investment account, trading account, banking account, etc.
4. any website used for storing details of ownership of any asset
5. remote server or cloud servers
6. digital application platforms
7. any other space of similar nature

Section 261(b) completes the picture on what can be taken away. Asset “includes any money, bullion, jewellery, virtual digital asset or other valuable article or thing, held in physical or virtual form”. Virtual digital asset is separately defined in section 2(111), and clause (d) of that definition expressly covers “any crypto-asset being a digital representation of value that relies on a cryptographically secured distributed ledger or a similar technology to validate and secure transactions”.

You will repeatedly see this power cited as section 247(1)(b)(iii). The gazette text is not built that way.

Section 247(1) states the grounds in clauses (a) and (b). Clause (a) covers a person who was issued a summons or notice and “has omitted or failed to produce” books of account, other documents, or information in electronic form or on a computer system, or who “will not, or would not, produce” them. Clause (b) covers a person in possession of any asset, or information in relation to any asset, representing income or property that has not been or would not be disclosed. Those two clauses are the trigger.

The powers are a separate list, numbered (i) to (vii), and they hang off sub-section (1) itself rather than off clause (b). The Act says so in its own cross-references:

• Section 246(2)© speaks of “the authorised officer referred to in section 247(1), before taking action under section 247(1)(i) to (vii)”.
• Section 247(3) refers to an officer authorised “to take action under sub-sections (1)(i) to (vii)”.
• Section 251(2) refers to material “seized under section 247(1) to (4)”.

So the accurate citation for the override power is section 247(1)(iii). And the phrase virtual digital space does not appear anywhere in section 247. It arrives only through the section 261(e) definition of computer system.

Section 247(1) does not let one official both decide and act. It splits the roles, and section 261 defines each role on its own terms.

• The competent authority is the one who must, “in consequence of information in his possession”, have “reason to believe” that clause (a) or clause (b) is made out. Section 261(d) lists six ranks for this role, running from Principal Director General or Director General down to Joint Commissioner or Additional Commissioner.
• The approving authority is the one who “may authorise”. Section 261(a) lists only four ranks: Principal Director General or Director General, Principal Chief Commissioner or Chief Commissioner, Principal Director or Director, and Principal Commissioner or Commissioner. The Joint and Additional levels are absent from this list.
• The authorised officer is the one who executes. Section 261© lists Joint Director or Additional Director, Joint Commissioner or Additional Commissioner, Assistant Director or Deputy Director, Assistant Commissioner or Deputy Commissioner, and Income-tax Officer or Tax Recovery Officer.

Two textual details are worth knowing before anyone quotes a designation at you. First, the list written inside section 247(1) itself is worded differently from section 261©: it names Joint Director, Joint Commissioner, Assistant Director, Assistant Commissioner and Income-tax Officer, and it does not name the Tax Recovery Officer. Second, section 247(1) builds in a second tier of authorisation, because a Joint Director or Joint Commissioner who has been so authorised “may authorise any Assistant Director or Assistant Commissioner or Income-tax Officer”, with the officer so authorised in all cases being the authorised officer.

Section 247(2) then lets an income-tax authority who has territorial jurisdiction over the premises, but no jurisdiction over the person, exercise the sub-section (1) powers anyway where he has reason to believe that any delay in getting the authorisation from the officer having jurisdiction “may be prejudicial to the interests of the revenue”. Section 247(3) covers premises that were never mentioned in the original authorisation.

Section 261(f)(i) is the clause that confirms the paperwork you should expect to see. For a search it fixes the relevant date by reference to “the date of conclusion of search as recorded in the last panchnama drawn in relation to any person in whose case the warrant of authorisation has been issued”. A warrant of authorisation and a panchnama are therefore both part of the statutory vocabulary of a search.

1. Enter and search any building, place, vessel, vehicle or aircraft where the officer “has reason to suspect” that such assets, books of account or other documents, or such information in electronic form or on a computer system are kept. Section 247(1)(i).
2. Require assistance, including the access code. Section 247(1)(ii) lets him require a person found in possession or control of records kept in the form of electronic record, or of information on a computer system, “to afford the authorised officer with such reasonable technical and other assistance (including access code, by whatever name called) as may be necessary to enable the authorised officer to inspect” those records. The controlling words are reasonable and as may be necessary.
3. Break open or override. Section 247(1)(iii). Two limits are on the face of it. The power exists “for exercising the powers conferred by clause (i)”, and it operates only “where the keys thereof are, or the access to such building, place, etc., or the access code to such computer system, as the case may be, is not available”. On the statutory language, override follows unavailability. It is not a first move.
4. Search a person who has got out of, is about to get into, or is in the premises or vehicle, where the officer has reason to suspect that the person “has secreted about his person” any such books of account, other documents, information in electronic form, computer systems or asset. Section 247(1)(iv).
5. Mark, extract and copy, and section 247(1)(v) says extracts and copies may be made “also from computer system”.
6. Make a note or an inventory of any such asset, and of the stock-in-trade of the business, found as a result of the search. Section 247(1)(vi).
7. Seize any such books of account, other documents, computer systems or asset found as a result of the search, expressly “other than stock-in-trade of the business”. Section 247(1)(vii).

Section 247(11) says the Board may make rules for the procedure to be followed, including for obtaining ingress where free ingress is not available and for ensuring safe custody of what is seized. Section 247(5)(b) allows the officer to requisition the services of a person or entity approved by a senior officer “in accordance with such procedure, as may be prescribed”. Section 247(9)(a) requires a valuation “in the manner, as may be prescribed”. Wherever the Act says prescribed, the detail is not in the Act. That is exactly what an RTI application is for, and the sample below asks for it.

Section 254, the power to collect certain information, is narrower still. Section 254(2) confines entry to the hours the business is open, and section 254(3) says the authority “shall, on no account, remove or cause to be removed from the building or place wherein it has entered, any books of account or other documents or any cash or stock or other valuable article or thing”.

Section 248, the requisition power, applies only some of section 247. Section 248(3) applies “the provisions of sections 247(4)(b), 247(7) to (11), 250 and 251” to requisitioned material. Section 247(1) is not in that list.

The rights are in the same Part as the powers, and they are the part nobody reads out to you.

• A restraint order expires. Section 247(4)(b)(ii): an order not to remove, part with or otherwise deal with books, documents, an asset, a bank locker, a bank account or a computer system “shall not remain in force for a period exceeding sixty days from the date of the order”. Section 247(4)(b)(iii) adds that serving such an order is not itself a seizure.
• You may copy what was taken. Section 251(2): on an application by the person from whose custody material was seized, the authorised officer “shall” allow that person, in the presence of the officer or a person empowered by him, “to make copies thereof or take extracts therefrom, at such place and time as appointed by such officer”.
• Retention is time-bound. Section 251(3)(a) allows retention up to one month from the end of the quarter in which the assessment, reassessment or recomputation order is made. Anything beyond that requires reasons in writing and approval under section 251(3)(b). Section 251(4) bars the approving authority from allowing retention “beyond thirty days from the date on which all the proceedings” for the relevant years are completed.
• You can object to extended retention. Section 251(5) lets a person legally entitled to the material apply to the Board stating the reasons for objecting, and the Board “may, after giving the applicant an opportunity of being heard, pass such orders as it thinks fit”.
• You can apply to get assets released. Section 250(2) allows the Assessing Officer to release seized assets on an application made within thirty days from the end of the month in which the asset was seized, subject to explanation of nature and source, recovery of existing liability, and prior approval. Section 250(3) says assets so referred to “shall be released within one hundred and twenty days from the date on which the last of the authorisations for the search or requisition was executed”.
• Money held too long carries interest. Section 250(8) provides for simple interest at 0.5% for every month or part of a month, computed on the formula in that sub-section, and section 250(9) fixes the period as running from the expiry of one hundred and twenty days after the last authorisation was executed to the date of completion of the assessment.

Two things decide where you send an application.

First, the Central Board of Direct Taxes is an ordinary public authority. It is not listed in the Second Schedule to the Right to Information Act, 2005. It is the body that section 247(11) empowers to make rules, that section 251(5) names as the forum for an objection to extended retention, and that issues the instructions officers actually work from.

Second, the Directorate General of Income-tax (Investigation) is in that Second Schedule. It is entry 16, and the India Code text carries the note that it was substituted by notification No. G.S.R. 235(E) dated 27-3-2008. Section 24(1) of the RTI Act says that nothing in the Act “shall apply to the intelligence and security organisations specified in the Second Schedule”. The first proviso keeps one channel open: “the information pertaining to the allegations of corruption and human rights violations shall not be excluded under this sub-section”. Outside that proviso, an application addressed to the Investigation wing is likely to come back refused. Send it to the Board.

To,
The Central Public Information Officer,
Central Board of Direct Taxes,
Department of Revenue, Ministry of Finance,
New Delhi.

Subject: Information under Section 6(1) of the RTI Act, 2005 regarding the
search and survey machinery under the Income-tax Act, 2025.

Sir/Madam,

Under Section 6(1) of the Right to Information Act, 2005, please provide the
following. I am not seeking any reason to believe or reason to suspect
recorded under Section 247 or 248 of the Income-tax Act, 2025.

1. A copy of the rules, if any, made by the Board under Section 247(11) of the
   Income-tax Act, 2025, with notification number and date. If no such rules
   have been notified as on the date of this application, please state so.

2. A copy of the procedure prescribed under Section 247(5)(b) for approval of
   any person or entity whose services may be requisitioned to assist in a
   search, and the manner prescribed under Section 247(9)(a) for estimating
   fair market value.

3. Copies of all instructions, circulars, guidelines or standard operating
   procedures issued to authorised officers on the exercise of the power under
   Section 247(1)(ii) to require an access code, and under Section 247(1)(iii)
   to override the access code to a computer system.

4. Copies of all instructions on the imaging, handling, chain of custody,
   retention and return of data obtained from a virtual digital space as
   defined in Section 261(j), including email servers, social media accounts
   and online banking or trading accounts.

5. A copy of the standard form of the warrant of authorisation, and of the
   panchnama referred to in Section 261(f), currently in use.

6. A copy of any scheme notified under Section 260, and any notification
   issued under Section 260(2).

7. The number of applications received under Section 251(5) objecting to
   extended retention in the last three financial years, the number allowed
   and the number rejected.

8. The designation, postal address and email address of the Central Public
   Information Officer and the First Appellate Authority for the office of the
   Principal Chief Commissioner of Income-tax having jurisdiction over the
   State named at the foot of this application.

I enclose the prescribed application fee of ₹10. If any part of this
information is held by another public authority, please transfer that part
under Section 6(3) within five days. Please supply the information within the
period fixed by Section 7(1).

Yours faithfully,
[Name]
[Full postal address]
[State]
[Date]

Point 1 is the one that matters most in 2026, because a nil answer is itself a finding worth publishing. Build the application with the AI RTI Drafter, set the thirty-day clock with the Timeline Tracker, and run any vague or deflecting reply through the PIO Reply Checker before you draft a first appeal.

• Citing section 247(1)(b)(iii). The Act numbers the powers under sub-section (1) and refers to them in its own text as section 247(1)(i) to (vii).
• Looking for the words virtual digital space in section 247. They are in section 261(j), reached through section 261(e).
• Treating override as the officer's opening move. Section 247(1)(iii) is expressed to apply where the access code “is not available”.
• Assuming a survey team has the same powers. Section 253 contains no override power, cannot remove any asset or stock under section 253(7), and is confined to business hours or daylight by section 253(3).
• Assuming stock-in-trade can be seized. Section 247(1)(vii) excludes it in terms.
• Letting a restraint order run indefinitely. Section 247(4)(b)(ii) caps it at sixty days.
• Never applying for copies. Section 251(2) exists precisely so that you are not left without your own records.
• Filing an RTI for the recorded satisfaction. Section 249 forbids its disclosure to any person or authority or the Appellate Tribunal.
• Addressing the Investigation wing. It is entry 16 of the Second Schedule to the RTI Act.

Section 247(1)(ii) lets an authorised officer in a search require a person in possession or control of records in electronic form to afford “such reasonable technical and other assistance (including access code, by whatever name called) as may be necessary” to enable inspection. Section 261(e) puts virtual digital space inside computer system, and section 261(j) lists email servers first among the things virtual digital space includes.

Two provisions bear on it. Section 247(1)(iii) lets the officer override the access code to a computer system where the access code “is not available”. Section 474 makes it an offence, punishable with rigorous imprisonment which may extend to two years and a fine, if a person “required to afford the authorised officer with the necessary facility to inspect the books of account or other documents, under section 247(1)(ii), fails to do so”. Those are the words of the Act. Take advice on your own facts.

Not the override. Section 253(1)(i) lets a survey authority require the necessary technical and other assistance including access code, but only as may be required and which may be available at that place. Section 253 contains no power to override an access code, and section 253(7) says the authority shall on no account remove any asset or stock from the place.

Section 1(3) of the Income-tax Act, 2025 says that save as otherwise provided in the Act, it shall come into force on the 1st April, 2026. The Act received the assent of the President on 21 August 2025.

Section 261(b) defines asset for this Part as including “any money, bullion, jewellery, virtual digital asset or other valuable article or thing, held in physical or virtual form”. Section 2(111)(d) brings within virtual digital asset “any crypto-asset being a digital representation of value that relies on a cryptographically secured distributed ledger or a similar technology”. Section 261(j)(iv) separately covers “any website used for storing details of ownership of any asset”.

Section 249 says the reason to believe or reason to suspect recorded under section 247 or 248 “shall not be disclosed to any person or authority or the Appellate Tribunal”. Section 22 of the RTI Act gives that Act effect notwithstanding anything inconsistent in any other law, so the interaction is contested. Expect a refusal, and put your application on rules, forms, instructions and numbers instead.

Section 251(3)(a) allows retention up to one month from the end of the quarter in which the assessment or reassessment or recomputation order is made, and section 251(3)(b) allows longer only on recorded reasons and approval. Section 251(4) bars retention beyond thirty days from the date all proceedings for the relevant years are completed. You may object under section 251(5) to the Board, which must give you an opportunity of being heard.

The Central Board of Direct Taxes, and separately the jurisdictional Principal Chief Commissioner. The Directorate General of Income-tax (Investigation) is entry 16 of the Second Schedule to the RTI Act, so under section 24(1) the RTI Act does not apply to it, save for the corruption and human rights proviso.

• The Income-tax Act, 2025, Act No. 30 of 2025, Gazette of India Extraordinary, Part II Section 1, No. 35, dated 21 August 2025: egazette.gov.in. Sections 1, 2(111), 246, 247, 248, 249, 250, 251, 253, 254, 260, 261, 473 and 474 are quoted above from that gazette text.
• The Right to Information Act, 2005, sections 22 and 24, full text on India Code: indiacode.gov.in
• The Second Schedule to the Right to Information Act, 2005, with the amending notifications, on India Code: indiacode.gov.in
• Right to Information Act, 2005: full text on this site

• The RTI Playbook, the full method from application to second appeal
• AI RTI Drafter to build the application above
• Timeline Tracker for the section 7 sub-section 1 deadline
• PIO Reply Checker to test a deflecting reply
• First Appeal Builder if the thirty days run out
• RTI Act, 2005, full text

Reviewed by Dr. Shrawan Kumar Pathak. Last verified against the Gazette of India text of the Income-tax Act, 2025 and the India Code text of the Right to Information Act, 2005 on 31 August 2026.