Case Laws & Commentary · Income-tax Act, 1961 (as amended by the Finance Act, 2026) · bharattax.co Treatise
Provision: Where the members of a Bench differ in opinion on any point, the point is decided according to the opinion of the majority; if the members are equally divided, the Chairman refers the case to one or more other members and the point is decided according to the majority of the members who have heard the case, including those who first heard it.
Heading: Decision to be by majority.
Finance Act, 2026: Not amended.
Authorities digested: 1 (candour rule — a decision-rule provision; mirrored for the Interim Board by section 245AA(3)).
A. SECTION COMMENTARY
1. The decision rule
Section 245BD supplies the rule for resolving differences within a Bench: the majority prevails, and an even division is broken by reference to additional members, the final decision being that of the majority of all who heard the matter. It is the settlement analogue of the third-member reference under section 255(4) for the Appellate Tribunal. Section 245AA(3) carries the identical majority rule into the three-member Interim Board.
2. Candour note
A decision-rule of this kind is not, in practice, separately litigated; challenges go to the resulting order, not to the counting of votes. No reported decision turning on section 245BD has been traced. The cognate Tribunal authority on majority/third-member procedure is noted for analogy.
B. STATUTORY POSITION (verbatim text)
The text of the section, as it stands in the Act (FA-2025 base), is set out below.
245BD. If the Members of a Bench differ in opinion on any point, the point shall be decided according to the opinion of the majority, if there is a majority, but if the Members are equally divided, they shall state the point or points on which they differ, and make a reference to the Chairman who shall either hear the point or points himself or refer the case for hearing on such point or points by one or more of the other Members of the Settlement Commission and such point or points shall be decided according to the opinion of the majority of the Members of the Settlement Commission who have heard the case, including those who first heard it:
Provided that the provisions of this section shall not apply on or after the 1st day of February, 2021.
C. AUTHORITIES
Decision-rule provision; cognate authority on majority/third-member procedure noted by analogy.
Candour — no direct authority; cognate section 255(4) analogy
Position: No reported decision turning on section 245BD has been traced. The closest analogue is the third-member reference under section 255(4) for the Appellate Tribunal, where the point of difference must be precisely formulated and the third member decides only that point (P.C. Puri principles). Cited by analogy only; section 245BD itself is self-executing and uncontested in the reported decisions.
Compiled for the bharattax.co Treatise on the Income-tax Act, 1961 (as amended by the Finance Act, 2026). Statutory text is reproduced from the Income-tax Act, 1961 (text as printed in the local Act, base text amended up to the Finance Act, 2025), with the publisher's footnote apparatus and amendment-marker brackets removed; three asterisks (***) denote words or a provision omitted by amendment and retained only to mark the omission. The Income-tax Settlement Commission ceased to operate for applications made on or after 1 February 2021 (Finance Act, 2021); pending applications stand transferred to the Interim Board for Settlement (section 245AA). Finance Act, 2026 makes no change to any section of Chapter XIX-A. Citations are stated as reported; orders of the Tribunal and High Courts are flagged as such. Where a section has not been judicially construed, that is stated candidly and the nearest governing authority is given. This material is for professional reference and is not legal advice.
CHAPTER XIX-A — SETTLEMENT OF CASES
Section 245BD — Decision to be by Majority
Case Laws & Commentary · Income-tax Act, 1961 (as amended by the Finance Act, 2026) · bharattax.co Treatise
Provision: Where the members of a Bench differ in opinion on any point, the point is decided according to the opinion of the majority; if the members are equally divided, the Chairman refers the case to one or more other members and the point is decided according to the majority of the members who have heard the case, including those who first heard it.
Heading: Decision to be by majority.
Finance Act, 2026: Not amended.
Authorities digested: 1 (candour rule — a decision-rule provision; mirrored for the Interim Board by section 245AA(3)).
A. SECTION COMMENTARY
1. The decision rule
Section 245BD supplies the rule for resolving differences within a Bench: the majority prevails, and an even division is broken by reference to additional members, the final decision being that of the majority of all who heard the matter. It is the settlement analogue of the third-member reference under section 255(4) for the Appellate Tribunal. Section 245AA(3) carries the identical majority rule into the three-member Interim Board.
2. Candour note
A decision-rule of this kind is not, in practice, separately litigated; challenges go to the resulting order, not to the counting of votes. No reported decision turning on section 245BD has been traced. The cognate Tribunal authority on majority/third-member procedure is noted for analogy.
B. STATUTORY POSITION (verbatim text)
The text of the section, as it stands in the Act (FA-2025 base), is set out below.
245BD. If the Members of a Bench differ in opinion on any point, the point shall be decided according to the opinion of the majority, if there is a majority, but if the Members are equally divided, they shall state the point or points on which they differ, and make a reference to the Chairman who shall either hear the point or points himself or refer the case for hearing on such point or points by one or more of the other Members of the Settlement Commission and such point or points shall be decided according to the opinion of the majority of the Members of the Settlement Commission who have heard the case, including those who first heard it:
Provided that the provisions of this section shall not apply on or after the 1st day of February, 2021.
C. AUTHORITIES
Decision-rule provision; cognate authority on majority/third-member procedure noted by analogy.
Cluster 1 — Cognate (majority / third-member procedure)
Candour — no direct authority; cognate section 255(4) analogy
Position: No reported decision turning on section 245BD has been traced. The closest analogue is the third-member reference under section 255(4) for the Appellate Tribunal, where the point of difference must be precisely formulated and the third member decides only that point (P.C. Puri principles). Cited by analogy only; section 245BD itself is self-executing and uncontested in the reported decisions.
Compiled for the bharattax.co Treatise on the Income-tax Act, 1961 (as amended by the Finance Act, 2026). Statutory text is reproduced from the Income-tax Act, 1961 (text as printed in the local Act, base text amended up to the Finance Act, 2025), with the publisher's footnote apparatus and amendment-marker brackets removed; three asterisks (***) denote words or a provision omitted by amendment and retained only to mark the omission. The Income-tax Settlement Commission ceased to operate for applications made on or after 1 February 2021 (Finance Act, 2021); pending applications stand transferred to the Interim Board for Settlement (section 245AA). Finance Act, 2026 makes no change to any section of Chapter XIX-A. Citations are stated as reported; orders of the Tribunal and High Courts are flagged as such. Where a section has not been judicially construed, that is stated candidly and the nearest governing authority is given. This material is for professional reference and is not legal advice.