Rule 226 explained: this guide covers what it means, who it applies to, the step-by-step process, documents required, fees, due dates and penalties in India — so you can stay compliant with confidence and avoid costly mistakes.
Rule 226 of the Income-tax Rules, 2026 lets the Chief Commissioner or Commissioner authorise a Tax Recovery Officer to exercise the Assessing Officer's section 287 rectification power on an order behind a section 413 certificate — concurrently with the Assessing Officer.
The problem the rule solves
Once a demand goes to recovery, the file is with the Tax Recovery Officer while the power to correct the order that created the demand stays with the Assessing Officer. If the demand contains an arithmetical or apparent error, the taxpayer is caught between two officers: the one who can fix it is no longer handling the matter, and the one handling it has no power to fix it. Rule 226 closes that gap.
What sub-rule (1) authorises
| Element | Provision in rule 226(1) |
|---|---|
| Who authorises | The Chief Commissioner of Income-tax or the Commissioner of Income-tax |
| How | By general or special order in writing |
| Who is authorised | A Tax Recovery Officer |
| What power | The powers and functions conferred on or assigned to an Assessing Officer under section 287, for rectifying any mistake apparent from record |
| On which order | An order passed by the Assessing Officer, consequent to which a sum is payable |
| Further condition | The Tax Recovery Officer has drawn a certificate under section 413 in respect of that sum |
Rule 226 does not give every Tax Recovery Officer a rectification power. It requires, cumulatively: a written authorisation from the Chief Commissioner or Commissioner; an Assessing Officer's order under which a sum is payable; and a certificate already drawn under section 413 in respect of that sum. Until the certificate exists, the Tax Recovery Officer has nothing to rectify under this rule — the power follows the certificate, not the file.
Note that the authorisation may be general. A Commissioner need not issue a fresh order for each case; a standing order covering a class of certificates satisfies rule 226(1) provided it is in writing.
Concurrent, not exclusive
Sub-rule (2) is a single line and it is the more important of the two: the Tax Recovery Officer shall exercise or perform such powers and functions concurrently with the Assessing Officer. The 1962 parallel is rule 117C.
| Question | Answer under rule 226(2) |
|---|---|
| Does the Assessing Officer lose the power? | No — it is exercised concurrently |
| Can the taxpayer approach either? | Yes, on the face of the sub-rule |
| Is the Tax Recovery Officer's order a section 287 order? | Yes — he exercises the section 287 power itself, not a substitute |
Because rule 226(2) leaves the Assessing Officer's power intact, two officers can act on the same mistake. In practice a rectification application should say plainly that a section 413 certificate has been drawn and that the application is made under section 287 read with rule 226, and a copy should go to both. Filing with one and assuming the other is seized of it is how a rectification sits unactioned while recovery continues.
What it does not extend to
- It is confined to section 287 — rectification of a mistake apparent from record. It is not a power to reassess, to reconsider merits, or to grant relief on equitable grounds.
- It attaches only to an order of the Assessing Officer under which a sum is payable. An order of another authority is outside rule 226.
- It requires the certificate to have been drawn by that Tax Recovery Officer, in respect of that sum.
- It confers no power to stay recovery; that question is governed elsewhere.
Worked example
| Facts | Position under rule 226 |
|---|---|
| Assessment demand contains a double-counted TDS credit; certificate drawn under section 413 | Authorised Tax Recovery Officer may rectify under section 287 |
| Commissioner has issued no authorisation | No power — sub-rule (1) requires a written order |
| Commissioner's standing order covers all certificates in the charge | Valid — a general order is permitted |
| Demand outstanding but no certificate yet drawn | Outside rule 226 — apply to the Assessing Officer |
| Taxpayer disputes the merits of a disallowance | Not a mistake apparent from record |
| Rectification filed only with the Tax Recovery Officer | Competent, but the Assessing Officer's power also survives |
| Both officers are moved on the same mistake | Permitted — the power is concurrent |
| Taxpayer asks the Tax Recovery Officer to stay recovery under this rule | Not conferred by rule 226 |
Compliance checklist
- Confirm a certificate under section 413 has actually been drawn before invoking rule 226.
- Ask whether the Commissioner has issued a general or special authorisation in the charge.
- Frame the application under section 287 — a mistake apparent from record, not a re-argument.
- Identify the Assessing Officer's order that created the sum, since the power attaches to it.
- Copy the application to both officers, given the concurrent power.
- Keep merits disputes to the appellate route; rule 226 is not a substitute.
- Deal with stay of recovery separately — this rule confers no such power.
Common mistakes
- Assuming every Tax Recovery Officer holds the power without an authorisation.
- Invoking rule 226 before the certificate is drawn.
- Dressing a merits objection as a rectification.
- Treating the Assessing Officer as functus officio once recovery begins.
- Expecting a stay of recovery from a rule that grants only rectification.
Which year this governs
The Income-tax Rules, 2026 are made under the Income-tax Act, 2025. The 1962 parallel to rule 226 is rule 117C, given for tracing only. Section references are to the Income-tax Act, 2025. Verify the current text before applying.