Section 502 of the Income-tax Act, 2025

Section 502 — Authentication of notices and other documents. Successor to s.282A of the 1961 Act.

Where this section sits

Section 502 is in Chapter XXIII — Miscellaneous, which runs from section 499 to section 536.

What this section does

Sub-section (1) requires that where the Act requires a notice or other document to be issued by an income-tax authority, it must be signed and issued in paper form, or communicated in electronic form, by that authority as per the procedure that may be prescribed.

Sub-section (2) supplies a deeming rule on authentication: every notice or other document to be issued, served or given under the Act by an income-tax authority is deemed to be authenticated if the name and office of a designated income-tax authority is printed, stamped or otherwise written on it. Sub-section (3) defines a "designated income-tax authority" as any income-tax authority authorised by the Board to issue, serve or give such notice or other document after authentication in the manner provided in sub-section (2).

Why it is there

Once notices are generated electronically and at scale, a handwritten signature is no longer the practical test of genuineness, so the section substitutes a printed or stamped name and office as the mark of authentication. Sub-section (3) keeps that from being open-ended by confining it to authorities the Board has authorised for the purpose.

Who it applies to

Any income-tax authority issuing, serving or giving a notice or other document under the Act
A designated income-tax authority authorised by the Board for the purposes of sub-section (2)
A person receiving such a notice or document

What this means in practice

Two things must be right for a notice to stand: the mode in sub-section (1) — signed and issued in paper form, or communicated in electronic form, as prescribed — and the authentication in sub-section (2), satisfied by the name and office of a designated income-tax authority being printed, stamped or otherwise written on the document. The absence of a manual signature is not by itself an answer, but the name must be that of an authority the Board has authorised for the purpose.

An example

Illustrative only, and invented for this page. The figures are chosen to show the rule biting, not taken from any real matter.

A taxpayer receives an electronically communicated notice bearing no handwritten signature but carrying the printed name and office of the authority issuing it. Under sub-section (2) that notice is deemed authenticated, provided the authority named is one authorised by the Board within sub-section (3) and the mode of communication follows the procedure prescribed under sub-section (1).

Where you meet this section

You meet this section on the face of every notice or order you receive — it is why a document carries a printed or stamped name and office rather than a manual signature.

The words themselves

shall be deemed to be authenticated, if the name and office of a designated income-tax authority is printed, stamped or otherwise written thereon

Section 502(2), Income-tax Act, 2025.

such notice or other document shall be signed and issued in paper form or communicated in electronic form by that authority as per such procedure, as may be prescribed

Section 502(1), Income-tax Act, 2025.

What people get wrong

Objecting to a notice merely because it carries no manual signature. Sub-section (2) deems it authenticated where the name and office of a designated income-tax authority appears on it.
Treating any officer's name as sufficient. Sub-section (3) confines the deeming to an authority authorised by the Board for the purpose.
Ignoring the mode requirement in sub-section (1).
Reading the section as applying only to notices. Both sub-sections cover a notice or other document to be issued, served or given under the Act.

What this replaced

The correspondence is the Income Tax Department’s own, from its comparison utility for the 1961 and 2025 Acts. A renumbering is the easy half; whether the words changed is the half that decides cases.

282A - Authentication of notices and other documents

See the full 1961 to 2025 concordance.

Case law carried across

Read this before you rely on it. Every decision below was decided under the Income-tax Act, 1961. It appears here because it is tagged to a 1961 provision that the department’s own mapping carries to section 502. That is an inference we have drawn, not a holding on the new section: where the words changed in the move, the reasoning may not survive. Treat this as the place to start looking, not as authority on the 2025 Act.

Daujee Abhushan Bhandar P Ltd v UOI High CourtHelps taxpayertagged s.282A
The s.148 notice was digitally signed on 31 March but the e-mail only went on 6 April. Was it issued in time?

What this page does not tell you. It does not reproduce the section. Everything above was written from the section’s own text as the Income Tax Department publishes it — the text is here, and nothing here is advice on your facts. Where a figure matters, read the sub-section it comes from.