CHAPTER XX — APPEALS AND REVISION | C.—Reference to High Court
CHAPTER XX — APPEALS AND REVISION | C.—Reference to High Court
Section 259 — Case before High Court to be Heard by Not Less Than Two Judges
Case Laws & Commentary — Income-tax Act, 1961 (as amended by the Finance Act, 2026) — bharattax.co Treatise
Status: Spent in practice (pre-1998 reference regime).
Finance Act, 2026: No amendment. The Finance Act, 2026 does not touch section 259.
Nature / mechanism: A reference to the High Court is to be heard by a Bench of not less than two Judges, and decided by the majority; on equal division, the point is reheard by one or more other Judges and decided by the majority including those who first heard it.
Litigation profile: Procedural; no substantive jurisprudence — candour rule.
A. COMMENTARY
Bench strength on a reference
Section 259 guarantees a Division Bench for income-tax references and prescribes the mechanism for resolving a difference of opinion among the Judges. It mirrors, for the reference jurisdiction, the two-Judge requirement now carried for section 260A appeals by section 260B.
B. STATUTORY TEXT (verbatim)
Reproduced verbatim from the Income-tax Act, 1961 (as amended up to the Finance Act, 2025); the Finance Act, 2026 makes no change to this section. Inline numerals in square brackets are the bare Act's amendment-footnote markers.
Case before High Court to be heard by not less than two judges.
259. (1) When any case has been referred to the High Court under section 256, it shall be heard by a Bench of not less than two Judges of the High Court, and shall be decided in accordance with the opinion of such judges or of the majority, if any, of such judges.
(2) Where there is no such majority, the judges shall state the point of law upon which they differ, and the case shall then be heard upon that point only by one or more of the other judges of the High Court, and such point shall be decided according to the opinion of the majority of the judges who have heard the case including those who first heard it.
C. AUTHORITIES
Candour rule — procedural; no construing decision.
Cluster 1 — Procedure (no direct authority)
Position (statutory)
Position Two-Judge minimum and majority decision; equal division resolved by rehearing before additional Judge(s).
CHAPTER XX — APPEALS AND REVISION | C.—Reference to High Court
Section 259 — Case before High Court to be Heard by Not Less Than Two Judges
Case Laws & Commentary — Income-tax Act, 1961 (as amended by the Finance Act, 2026) — bharattax.co Treatise
Status: Spent in practice (pre-1998 reference regime).
Finance Act, 2026: No amendment. The Finance Act, 2026 does not touch section 259.
Nature / mechanism: A reference to the High Court is to be heard by a Bench of not less than two Judges, and decided by the majority; on equal division, the point is reheard by one or more other Judges and decided by the majority including those who first heard it.
Litigation profile: Procedural; no substantive jurisprudence — candour rule.
A. COMMENTARY
Bench strength on a reference
Section 259 guarantees a Division Bench for income-tax references and prescribes the mechanism for resolving a difference of opinion among the Judges. It mirrors, for the reference jurisdiction, the two-Judge requirement now carried for section 260A appeals by section 260B.
B. STATUTORY TEXT (verbatim)
Reproduced verbatim from the Income-tax Act, 1961 (as amended up to the Finance Act, 2025); the Finance Act, 2026 makes no change to this section. Inline numerals in square brackets are the bare Act's amendment-footnote markers.
Case before High Court to be heard by not less than two judges.
259. (1) When any case has been referred to the High Court under section 256, it shall be heard by a Bench of not less than two Judges of the High Court, and shall be decided in accordance with the opinion of such judges or of the majority, if any, of such judges.
(2) Where there is no such majority, the judges shall state the point of law upon which they differ, and the case shall then be heard upon that point only by one or more of the other judges of the High Court, and such point shall be decided according to the opinion of the majority of the judges who have heard the case including those who first heard it.
C. AUTHORITIES
Candour rule — procedural; no construing decision.
Cluster 1 — Procedure (no direct authority)
Position (statutory)
Position Two-Judge minimum and majority decision; equal division resolved by rehearing before additional Judge(s).
Caution Stated from the bare provision.