Section 269 — Definition of High Court

CHAPTER XX — APPEALS AND REVISION | F.—General

Section 269 — Definition of “High Court”

Case Laws & Commentary — Income-tax Act, 1961 (as amended by the Finance Act, 2026) — bharattax.co Treatise

Status: Live. Defines 'High Court' for the purposes of Chapter XX, mapping States/Union Territories to the High Court having jurisdiction.

Finance Act, 2026: No amendment. The Finance Act, 2026 does not touch section 269.

Nature / mechanism: Definition clause — identifies, for each State/Union Territory, the High Court that is the 'High Court' for Chapter XX (relevant to sections 256-262).

Litigation profile: Definitional; no substantive jurisprudence — candour rule. It matters chiefly for fixing the High Court of competent jurisdiction.

A. COMMENTARY

Fixing the competent High Court

Section 269 supplies the territorial map of which High Court is the 'High Court' for Chapter XX in relation to each State and Union Territory. Its practical importance lies in the jurisdictional questions that arise under sections 256-262 — including which High Court's decision binds a given assessment and, by extension (per Saurashtra Kutch), whose non-consideration is a rectifiable mistake under section 254(2).

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.

Definition of "High Court".

269. In this Chapter,— "High Court" means—

(i)in relation to any State, the High Court for that State ;

(ii)in relation to the Union territory of Delhi, the High Court of Delhi ;

(iia) [***]

(iii)[***]

(iv) in relation to the Union territory of the Andaman and Nicobar Islands, the High Court at Calcutta ;

(v) in relation to the Union territory of Lakshadweep, the High Court of Kerala ;

(va) in relation to the Union territory of Chandigarh, the High Court of Punjab and Haryana ;

(vi) in relation to the Union territories of Dadra and Nagar Haveli and Daman and Diu, the High Court at Bombay ; and

(vii) in relation to the Union territory of Pondicherry, the High Court at Madras. CHAPTER XX-A

C. AUTHORITIES

Candour rule — definitional; cognate jurisdictional relevance noted.

Cluster 1 — Cognate: jurisdiction and binding precedent

ACIT v. Saurashtra Kutch Stock Exchange Ltd., (2008) 305 ITR 227 (SC)

Relevance The identity of the jurisdictional High Court (fixed via section 269) determines whose decision binds the Tribunal and whose non-consideration is a mistake apparent under section 254(2).