OJASVI MEDIA MATRIX PRIVATE LIMITED,INDORE vs. WARD 1(2)(3), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 6254/MUM/2025Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 April 2026AY 2018-194 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal dismissed the appeal in limine as time-barred due to a significant delay of 639 days without any condonation application. The assessee's consistent non-compliance before lower authorities and the Tribunal demonstrated a lack of diligence.

What were the facts?

The assessee company filed its return declaring 'Nil' income. The Assessing Officer made additions for unexplained credits and disallowed F&O losses due to non-compliance. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal ex-parte for non-compliance.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal is maintainable due to significant delay and lack of condonation application. Whether the assessee's non-compliance warrants dismissal of the appeal.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 69A,Section 115BBE,Section 144,Section 144B,Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “H(SMC

Before: AND SHRI MAKARAND VASANT MAHADEOKAR, AM

For Respondent: Shri Pravin Salunkhe, Sr. DR
Hearing: 26.03.2026Pronounced: 30.04.2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “H(SMC)” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL, JM AND SHRI MAKARAND VASANT MAHADEOKAR, AM ITA No.6254/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year: 2018-19)

M/s. Ojasvi Media Matrix NFAC, Delhi Private Limited, 852, Sudama Nagar, Vs. In front of Jain Mandir, Indore, Madhya Pradesh – 452 009 PAN: AABCO1930D (Appellant) : (Respondent)

Assessee by : None Respondent by : Shri Pravin Salunkhe, Sr. DR

Date of Hearing : 26.03.2026 Date of Pronouncement : 30.04.2026

O R D E R Per Kavitha Rajagopal, JM:

This appeal is filed by the assessee challenging the order of the Learned

Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [‘Ld. CIT(A)’ for short], National Faceless Appeal Centre (‘NFAC’ for short) passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act” for short) relevant to assessment year (“AY” for short) 2018-19.

2.

As there was no representation either by the assessee nor by its authorized representative, we hereby proceed to decide this appeal ex-parte by hearing the Ld. Departmental Representative (“Ld. DR” for short) and on perusal of the materials available on record.

3.

The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:

ITA No.6254/Mum/2025 M/s. Ojasvi Media Matrix Private Limited “1. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law Ld. AO has erred in making arbitrary addition of Rs. 49,94,734 being unexplained money U/s 69A r.w.s. 115BBE of Income Tax Act, 1961 in the form of credit entries in bank account of the assessee. Ld. AO passed the assessment order and Ld. CIT (A) vide impugned order confirmed the assessment order in an ex-parte manner without affording any opportunity of being heard against the principles of natural justice.

2.

That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law Ld. AO has erred in making arbitrary disallowance of F&O loss of Rs. 1,38,26,199 claimed by the assessee. Ld. AO passed the assessment order and Ld. CIT (A) vide impugned order confirmed the assessment order in an ex-parte manner without affording any opportunity of being heard against the principles of natural justice.

3.

That the impugned order so passed by Ld. AO and confirmed by Ld. CIT (A) is illegal and wrong.

4.

That the assessee craves your honors leave to add, amend, alter OR delete any of the grounds of appeals and all the above grounds are mutually exclusive to each other.”

4.

Brief facts of the case are that the assessee company filed its return of income dated

15.10.2018 declaring total income at Rs.“Nil” for the year under consideration and the case

was selected for scrutiny under CASS and notices u/s 142(1) of the Act were duly issued

and served upon the assessee. The assessee failed to respond to the notices and the Ld.

Assessing Officer (“Ld. AO” for short) proceeded to pass the assessment order u/s 144

r.w.s 144B of the Act being best judgment assessment vide order dated 21.04.2021 thereby

making an addition of Rs.49,94,734/- on account of unexplained credits in the bank account

u/s 69A of the Act and disallowance of Rs.1,38,26,199/- as brought forward losses on

commodity trading and F&O trading where the assessee has failed to explain the said loss.

5.

Aggrieved, the assessee was in appeal before the first appellate authority who vide

an ex-parte order dated 19.10.2023 dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee for non-

compliance inspite of various opportunities granted to the assessee. 2

ITA No.6254/Mum/2025 M/s. Ojasvi Media Matrix Private Limited

6.

Aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before us challenging the impugned order of

the Ld. CIT(A).

7.

We have heard the Ld. DR and perused the materials available on record. Before

getting into the merits of the case, it is observed that the assessee has filed the appeal

belatedly with a delay of 639 days beyond the period of limitation, for which neither an

affidavit nor an application for condonation of the delay was filed before us. Further, as

the assessee has failed to explain that there was “sufficient cause” for the delay, we find no

justification in deciding the appeal on the merits of the case on the basis of the available

materials on record. The assessee has also been non-compliant before the lower authorities

as well as before us and also in the absence of any condonation petition or affidavit filed,

the assessee has shown lack of diligence and bonafides which justifies the dismissal of the

appeal in limine as time barred. We, therefore, deem it fit to dismiss the grounds of appeal

raised by the assessee.

8.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 30.04.2026

Sd/- Sd/- (MAKARAND VASANT MAHADEOKAR) (KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER

Mumbai; Dated: 30.04.2026 * Kishore, Sr. P.S.

Copy of the Order forwarded to: 1. The Appellant 3

ITA No.6254/Mum/2025 M/s. Ojasvi Media Matrix Private Limited 2. The Respondent 3. CIT- concerned 4. DR, ITAT, Mumbai 5. Guard File BY ORDER,

(Dy./Asstt.Registrar) ITAT, Mumbai

More judgments on Section 69A

All 15,297 judgments and leading authorities on Section 69A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →