HALLMARK LIFESPACE PRIVATE LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. ITO WARD 7(1)(1), MUMBAI

ITA 2008/MUM/2026Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 October 2026AY 2015-1616 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that there was a delay in filing the appeal, which was condoned after considering the assessee's application and affidavit, as the revenue did not rebut the contents. The Tribunal then proceeded to adjudicate the appeal. The primary issue was the dismissal of the assessee's appeal by the CIT(A) for non-prosecution. The Tribunal observed that the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal without adjudicating on the merits. The Tribunal found that the assessee's company name was struck off, which was the reason for non-prosecution before the CIT(A). However, the Tribunal did not decide the other grounds of appeal concerning the validity of the re-opening, sanction under Section 151, and the disallowance of business loss, as the appeal was being disposed of on a procedural aspect. The Tribunal directed the CIT(A) to decide the appeal on merits after restoration.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Hallmark Lifespace Private Limited, filed an appeal against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-NFAC, Delhi, dated 24.04.2026, for Assessment Year 2015-16. The Assessing Officer (AO) re-opened the assessment under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, based on information that the claimed business loss of Rs. 52,93,019/- from equity derivatives on the BSE platform, due to reversal trades, was non-genuine. The AO issued a notice under Section 148 on 16.03.2020, to which the assessee responded on 07.09.2021. The assessment was completed under Section 147 read with Section 144B on 28.09.2021, determining the total income as a loss of Rs. 1,09,608/- and disallowing the Rs. 52,93,019/- loss claimed on reversal trades. The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed for non-prosecution.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Tribunal has to decide the appeal on merits, or if the dismissal by the CIT(A) for non-adjudication on merits is against the provisions of Section 250(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The assessee contends that the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal without adjudicating on the merits, which is contrary to Section 250(6). The revenue has not recorded any specific contention on this ground. 2. Whether the re-opening of assessment under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, by the Assessing Officer was illegal, void, and bad in law, solely based on an investigation wing report without independent application of mind. The assessee argues that the re-opening is illegal as it lacks independent application of mind by the AO. The revenue has not recorded any specific contention on this ground. 3. Whether the sanction obtained under Section 151 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for re-opening the assessment was without application of mind, rendering subsequent proceedings illegal, void, and bad in law. The assessee contends that the sanction under Section 151 was flawed, making the subsequent proceedings invalid. The revenue has not recorded any specific contention on this ground. 4. Whether the disallowance of business loss of Rs. 52,93,019/- by the Assessing Officer and confirmed by the CIT(A) is unjustified and ought to be deleted. The assessee argues that the disallowance is unjustified. The revenue has not recorded any specific contention on this ground.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250(6),Section 147,Section 144B,Section 148,Section 151

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “E” BENCH; MUMBAI

Hearing: 14.07.2026Pronounced: 08.10.2026

PER VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, A.M :

This is an appeal filed by the Assessee against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [‘Ld.CIT(A)’], dated 24.04.2026, pertaining to Assessment Year (AY) 2015-16, wherein the Assessee has taken the following grounds of appeal:

“1. The Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals -NFAC erred in dismissing the appeal without adjudicating the appeal on the merits of the case. That the dismissal of appeal is against the provisions of section 250(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. The Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals - NFAC erred in confirming the actions of the Assessing

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →