Section 374 of the Income-tax Act, 2025

Section 374 — Interpretation of "High Court". Successor to s.269 of the 1961 Act.

Where this section sits

Section 374 is in Chapter XVIII — Appeals Revisions and Alternate Dispute Resolutions, which runs from section 356 to section 389.

← Section 373 · Section 375 →

What this section does

The section defines "High Court" for Chapter XVIII. For any State it is the High Court for that State. For the Union territories of Jammu and Kashmir and of Ladakh it is the High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh. For the Andaman and Nicobar Islands it is the High Court at Calcutta; for Lakshadweep, the High Court of Kerala; for Chandigarh, the High Court of Punjab and Haryana; for Dadra and Nagar Haveli and Daman and Diu, the High Court at Bombay; for Puducherry, the High Court at Madras; and for the National Capital Territory of Delhi, the High Court of Delhi.

Why it is there

Chapter XVIII gives rights of appeal and reference to a High Court, and a Union territory does not necessarily have one of its own. The section removes any doubt about which High Court a matter arising in each territory belongs to.

Who it applies to

A party filing an appeal or other proceeding to a High Court under Chapter XVIII
An assessee or income-tax authority whose case arises in a Union territory or the National Capital Territory of Delhi

What this means in practice

This is a mapping and nothing more; it confers no right and imposes no obligation. Its use is at the moment of filing — a matter arising in a Union territory goes to the High Court the list names, not to the court nearest the assessee or the officer who passed the order. Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh are listed separately but both point to the same High Court.

Where you meet this section

You meet this section when settling where an appeal or reference under Chapter XVIII is to be filed, particularly for a case arising in a Union territory or in the National Capital Territory of Delhi.

The words themselves

for any State, the High Court for that State

Section 374(i), Income-tax Act, 2025.

for the Union territory of Lakshadweep, the High Court of Kerala

Section 374(v), Income-tax Act, 2025.

What people get wrong

Reading the section as conferring a right of appeal. It only defines which court is the High Court for Chapter XVIII.
Assuming every Union territory has its own High Court. Clauses (iv) to (viii) map five of them to the Calcutta, Kerala, Punjab and Haryana, Bombay and Madras High Courts.
Filing a Ladakh matter separately from Jammu and Kashmir. Clauses (ii) and (iii) both name the High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh.

What this replaced

The correspondence is the Income Tax Department’s own, from its comparison utility for the 1961 and 2025 Acts. A renumbering is the easy half; whether the words changed is the half that decides cases.

269 - Definition of “High Court”

See the full 1961 to 2025 concordance.

Circulars of the Board on this section

A circular binds the department, not you and not a court. Every one below was written under the 1961 Act; it reaches this section because the department’s own concordance carries the provision it names to this one.

Circular No. 16/2020 — F .No .370142/35/2019-TPL-Pt 2020-08-30

See the circulars index.

What this page does not tell you. It does not reproduce the section. Everything above was written from the section’s own text as the Income Tax Department publishes it — the text is here, and nothing here is advice on your facts. Where a figure matters, read the sub-section it comes from.