Chapter XXII - Offences and Prosecution
Section 488
Section 488: offences by Hindu undivided family
Section 488 is the HUF counterpart to Section 487's company-liability rule. It makes the karta of a Hindu undivided family (HUF) responsible when the HUF commits an offence under the Act, subject to a due-diligence defence, and separately extends liability to any member whose consent, connivance or neglect contributed to the offence.
On this page
Need advice on Section 488?
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
(1) Where an offence under this Act has been committed by a Hindu undivided family, the karta thereof shall be deemed to be guilty of the offence and shall be liable to be proceeded against and punished accordingly.
(2) Nothing contained in sub-section (1) shall render the karta liable to any punishment, if he proves that the offence was committed without his knowledge or that he had exercised all due diligence to prevent the commission of such offence.
(3) Irrespective of anything contained in sub-sections (1) and (2), where an offence under this Act, has been committed by a Hindu undivided family and it is proved that the offence has been committed with the consent or connivance of, or is attributable to any neglect on the part of, any member of the Hindu undivided family, such member shall also be deemed to be guilty of that offence and shall be liable to be proceeded against and punished accordingly.
Introduction
For an offence committed by a Hindu undivided family, section 488 addresses deemed liability of its karta and, separately, of a member whose consent, connivance or neglect caused the offence.
The karta may avoid punishment by proving lack of knowledge or that all due diligence was exercised to prevent the offence.
Key takeaways
Karta deemed liable
An offence by the HUF triggers subsection (1) for the karta.
Karta defence
Lack of knowledge or all due diligence to prevent the offence may avoid punishment when proved.
Other members
Consent, connivance or neglect linked to the offence can make a member liable under subsection (3).
Liability of the karta
"Where an offence under this Act has been committed by a Hindu undivided family, the karta thereof shall be deemed to be guilty of the offence and shall be liable to be proceeded against and punished accordingly."
Due-diligence defence for the karta
The karta is not liable to any punishment if he proves that the offence was committed without his knowledge, or that he had exercised all due diligence to prevent its commission.
Liability of other members
Irrespective of the rule and defence above, where an offence under the Act has been committed by a Hindu undivided family and it is proved that it was committed with the consent or connivance of, or is attributable to any neglect on the part of, any member of the HUF, that member shall also be deemed to be guilty of the offence and shall be liable to be proceeded against and punished accordingly.
Step-by-step flow for applying Section 488
- 1
Was the offence committed by a Hindu undivided family?
- No: Section 488 does not apply; for a company, firm or AOP/BOI see Section 487.
- Yes: Go to the next step.
- 2
The karta is deemed guilty
Under Section 488(1), the karta is deemed guilty and liable to be proceeded against and punished.
- 3
Can the karta prove lack of knowledge or all due diligence?
Section 488(2). The burden is on the karta.
- Yes, proved: The karta is not liable to punishment; go to the next step for members.
- No: The karta remains liable; go to the next step for members.
- 4
Is it proved that a member consented, connived, or was neglectful?
Section 488(3) applies irrespective of Section 488(1) and (2).
- Yes: That member is also deemed guilty.
- No: Only the karta's position under Section 488(1) and (2) remains.
Practical checklist
Do
- Identify the alleged HUF offence and the karta, then retain evidence relevant to lack of knowledge or all due diligence to prevent that offence.
- For another HUF member, separately examine proof of consent, connivance or neglect connected with the offence.
Avoid
- Do not infer liability of every HUF member solely from membership, or treat the karta’s two stated defences as cumulative requirements.
Illustrative example
Worked example: an HUF business run by a member
Hypothetical facts (illustration only, not a real taxpayer): An HUF carries on a trading business. The karta is elderly and a member runs the business. The member collects tax at source but does not pay it to the Central Government, an offence under Section 477. The karta had arranged an outside accountant to monitor TCS payments and had given written instructions that all collections be paid on time.
Karta
Under Section 488(1) the karta is deemed guilty because the HUF committed the offence.
Karta's defence
His monitoring arrangement and written instructions may establish due diligence under Section 488(2); he must prove it.
Member
The failure is attributable to the member who ran the business, so if this is proved the member is deemed guilty under Section 488(3).
Other defences
Section 486 (reasonable cause) and Section 477(2) (payment before the prescribed time) remain available on the facts.
Outcome
- If due diligence is proved, the karta escapes punishment while the member may still be proceeded against.
- Section 488 decides who is liable; the punishment comes from the offence section.
Frequently asked questions
Who is primarily liable when an HUF commits an offence under the Act?
The karta of the Hindu undivided family is deemed guilty of the offence and liable to be proceeded against and punished accordingly, under Section 488(1).
Is there a defence available to the karta?
Yes - the karta is not liable to punishment if he proves the offence was committed without his knowledge, or that he had exercised all due diligence to prevent it.
Can a member of the HUF other than the karta be held liable?
Yes - any member is also deemed guilty and liable to be proceeded against and punished if it is proved the offence was committed with that member's consent or connivance, or is attributable to that member's neglect.
Need help applying this provision to your situation?
Talk to our tax team about an HUF prosecution matterLast updated 10 October 2026