Rule 267 of the Income-tax Rules, 2026

Where this rule sits

← Rule 266  ·  Rule 268 →

What this rule does

The rule deals with a change of Inquiry Officer during an inquiry. If it becomes necessary to change the Inquiry Officer, the prescribed authority may appoint another Inquiry Officer not below the rank of an Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, and the proceedings shall continue with the new Inquiry Officer from the point where they were left by his predecessor.

Why it is there

An inquiry may outlast the officer conducting it. Without a provision of this kind the change would raise two questions — who may replace him, and whether the inquiry must start again. The rule answers both: a minimum rank for the successor, and continuation from the point already reached rather than a fresh start.

Who it applies to

• The prescribed authority appointing a replacement Inquiry Officer
• The Inquiry Officer newly appointed, who must be of a rank not below Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax
• The person against whom the inquiry is being conducted

The figures, and what each one turns on

What this means in practice

The successor takes the inquiry as he finds it: the rule directs that the proceedings continue from the point where they were left, so evidence already recorded and steps already taken stand and need not be repeated. The only limit on the choice of successor stated in the rule is one of rank, not below Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax. The rule is permissive as to appointment — the prescribed authority may appoint another Inquiry Officer — but mandatory as to what follows, since the proceedings shall continue from that point.

An example

An Inquiry Officer who has recorded the statements of two witnesses is transferred midway. The prescribed authority appoints a successor of the rank of Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, which is not below that of Assistant Commissioner. The successor proceeds from the next step in the inquiry rather than recording those statements again.

Where you meet this rule

A reader meets it in the order appointing a new Inquiry Officer during a pending inquiry, and in any objection taken to the continuation of proceedings after such a change.

The words themselves

What people get wrong

• Assuming the inquiry must begin afresh on a change of officer. The rule requires it to continue from the point where it was left.
• Overlooking the rank requirement. The successor must not be below the rank of an Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax.
• Reading the rule as requiring a change in stated circumstances. It applies where it becomes necessary to change the Inquiry Officer, and the appointment is in the prescribed authority's discretion.