Chapter XVIII - Appeals, Revision and Advance Rulings
Section 382
Section 382: vacancies don't invalidate Board for Advance Rulings proceedings
Section 382 is a short, purely procedural safeguard clause: it prevents an advance ruling, or the proceedings leading to it, from being challenged purely on a technicality about how the Board for Advance Rulings was constituted at the time.
On this page
Need advice on Section 382?
This article is for general information. Refer to the Income-tax Act, 2025 as amended by the Finance Act, 2026 and the Taxation and Other Laws (Amendment) Act, 2026 for the official provisions. If you need professional advice for your situation, contact Bizeneed.
Statutory text
Bare law
No proceeding before, or pronouncement of advance ruling by, the Board for Advance Rulings, shall be questioned or shall be invalid on the ground merely of the existence of any vacancy or defect in the constitution of the Board for Advance Rulings.
Introduction
Section 382 prevents a Board for Advance Rulings proceeding or ruling from being challenged merely because the Board has a vacancy or a defect in its constitution.
The word “merely” matters: this provision addresses that specific ground. It does not decide every other possible objection to a proceeding or ruling.
Key takeaways
Both proceeding and ruling covered
The section protects a proceeding before the Board and the pronouncement of an advance ruling.
Specific ground excluded
A vacancy or defect in Board constitution alone does not invalidate them.
What the section says
"No proceeding before, or pronouncement of advance ruling by, the Board for Advance Rulings, shall be questioned or shall be invalid on the ground merely of the existence of any vacancy or defect in the constitution of the Board for Advance Rulings."
Why this matters
A vacancy or defect in the Board’s constitution, standing alone, cannot invalidate its proceeding or ruling. The section does not decide other possible grounds of challenge.
Applying Section 382 in practice
Effect. A proceeding or advance ruling cannot be attacked *merely* because a Board seat was vacant or there was a defect in the Board's constitution. The word “merely” matters: this is not a blanket cure for a wrong question, fraud, lack of notice or any other independent defect. Keep the procedural challenge tied to its actual ground.
Hypothetical example
A member's appointment paperwork contains a technical defect. That fact alone does not invalidate a ruling under section 382. Whether another substantive objection succeeds is a separate question.
Step-by-step flow for applying Section 382
- 1
Is a proceeding before, or an advance ruling of, the Board for Advance Rulings being challenged?
- No: Section 382 is not relevant.
- Yes: Go to the next step.
- 2
What is the ground of challenge?
Identify whether the ground is a vacancy or a defect in the constitution of the Board for Advance Rulings, or something else.
- 3
Is the challenge based merely on a vacancy or a defect in constitution?
- Yes: Under Section 382, the proceeding or ruling is not invalid and cannot be questioned on that ground alone.
- No: Go to the next step.
- 4
Examine the other ground under the relevant provision
Section 382 protects only against the bare ground of vacancy or defect. Other grounds, such as a ruling obtained by fraud or misrepresentation under section 386, are dealt with under their own provisions.
Practical checklist
Do
- Identify whether the objection is solely a vacancy or defect in the Board’s constitution before applying section 382.
- Separate any other claimed ground of challenge from the vacancy or constitution point.
Avoid
- Do not read this limited validation rule as deciding every possible challenge to an advance ruling.
Illustrative example
Worked example: a member's post falls vacant
Hypothetical facts (illustration only, not a real taxpayer): During the hearing of an advance ruling application, one member of the Board for Advance Rulings retires and the post is vacant for some time. The ruling is later pronounced. The applicant is unhappy with the ruling and wants to challenge it only because there was a vacancy during the proceeding.
Ground
The only ground raised is the vacancy in the Board for Advance Rulings.
Effect of Section 382
Section 382 says no proceeding or ruling is invalid, or can be questioned, merely because of a vacancy or a defect in constitution.
Other grounds
If the applicant had other grounds, they would be examined under the provisions that deal with them; Section 382 does not decide those.
Outcome
- The challenge based only on the vacancy fails.
- The ruling stands unless it is displaced on some other ground under the Act.
Glossary
- Vacancy
- A post of member of the Board for Advance Rulings that is unfilled at the relevant time.
- Defect in constitution
- An irregularity in how the Board for Advance Rulings is formed. Under Section 382 this alone does not invalidate its proceedings or rulings.
Frequently asked questions
Can I challenge an advance ruling just because a Board member's seat was vacant at the time?
No - Section 382 specifically prevents an advance ruling or the proceedings leading to it from being invalidated merely because of a vacancy or a defect in how the Board for Advance Rulings was constituted.
What kind of body does this section protect?
The Board for Advance Rulings, constituted under Section 381, which issues advance rulings under this Chapter.
Need help applying this provision to your situation?
Get help seeking an advance ruling on your tax positionLast updated 10 October 2026