IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR BEFORE SH. SANJAY ARORA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. N.K.CHOUDHRY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.499(ASR)/2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2011-12 SH. MOHD SIDIQ MATH, S/O SH. MOHD. ABDULLAH MATH, R/O QAMARWARI, SRINAGAR. [PAN:BSCPM 3680H] VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-3(2), SRINAGAR. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY: NONE RESPONDENT BY: SH. CHARAN DASS (DR) DATE OF HEARING: 07.03.2019 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 26.03.2019 ORDER PER N.K.CHOUDHRY, JM: THE INSTANT APPEAL HAS BEEN PREFERRED BY THE ASSESSEE/A PPELLANT AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 30.03.2017, PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A), JAMMU, J&K U/S 250(6) OF THE I.T. ACT, 1961 (HEREINAFTER CALLED A S THE ACT). 2. AT THE OUTSET, IT WAS OBSERVED THAT THERE IS A DELAY O F 78 DAYS IN FILING OF THE INSTANT APPEAL WHICH HAS BEEN EXPLAINED BY THE ASSESSEE BY SUBMITTING AS UNDER: THE APPELLANT IS A SENIOR CITIZEN WITH BAD HEALTH C ONDITION AND DUE TO THE ILL HEALTH, THE APPELLANT COULDNT COMPLETE THE REQUISITE APPEAL DOCUMENTS AND SIGN THE FORM-36, PREPARED BY THE COU NSEL; THEREFORE, CAUSED THE DELAY IN FILING THE APPEAL BE FORE YOUR HONOUR, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12. THAT ALSO DUE TO THE RECENT CURFEW, HARTALS, STRIKE S AND THE HAVOC CREATED BY THE MISCREANTS DURING THE LAST TWO MONTH S, THUS ITA NO.499/ASR/2017 (A.Y.2011-12) MOHD. SIDIQ MATH VS. ITO 2 PARALYZING THE LIVES/ MOVEMENT OF THE COMMON PEOPLE WAS ALSO A REASON TO CAUSE DELAY IN FILING THE APPEAL BEFORE Y OUR HONOUR . THE LD. DR DID NOT RAISE SPECIFIC OBJECTION ON THE REASO N FOR DELAY AS TAKEN BY THE ASSESSEE. CONSIDERING THE DELAY IS REASONABLE ON THE BASIS OF THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE THAT HE IS A SENIOR CITIZEN WITH THE BAD HEALTH CO NDITION AND THEREFORE COULD NOT COMPLETE THE REQUISITE APPEAL DOC UMENTS AND EVEN OTHERWISE DUE TO CURFEW, HARTAL, STRIKES AND THE HAVOC CR EATED BY THE MISCREANTS DURING MAY, 2017, PARALYZED THE LIVES/MOVEM ENT OF THE COMMON PEOPLE AND THEREFORE THE DELAY HAS BEEN OCCURRED. WE A RE INCLINED TO CONDONE THE DELAY HENCE THE DELAY OF 78 DAYS IN FILE T HE INSTANT APPEAL STANDS CONDONED. 3. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, NO ONE WAS PRESENT ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE, AND NEITHER ANY ADJOURNMENT APPLICATION WAS FILED IN THIS CASE. FROM THE RECORDS, IT IS OBSERVED THAT THE DUE NOTICE FOR THE DAT E OF HEARING FOR 07.03.2019 WAS ISSUED WHICH WAS SENT THROUGH RPAD AND EVE N THEN NOBODY HAS APPEARED. FROM THE ABOVE, IT IS OBSERVED THAT ASSESSE E IS NOT INTERESTED IN PROSECUTION OF ITS APPEAL. THEREFORE, CONSIDERING TH E FACTS AND KEEPING IN MIND THE PROVISIONS OF RULE 19(2) OF THE INCOME-TAX (A PPELLATE TRIBUNAL) RULES, 1963, AS WAS CONSIDERED IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. MULTIPLAN INDIA LTD, REPORTED IN 38 ITD 320(DEL.), WE TREAT THIS APPEAL AS UN-ADMITTED. ACCORDINGLY, THE APPEAL IS DISMISSED FOR WANT OF PROSECUTI ON. THE ASSESSEE, IF SO ADVISED, SHALL BE FREE TO MOVE THIS TRIBUNAL PRAYING FOR RECALLING OF THIS ORDER AND EXPLAINING THE REASONS FOR NON-COMPLIANCE, ET C. AND IF THE BENCH IS SO SATISFIED ABOUT THE REASONS, ETC., IT CAN RECALL THE AB OVE ORDER. ITA NO.499/ASR/2017 (A.Y.2011-12) MOHD. SIDIQ MATH VS. ITO 3 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED FO R WANT OF PROSECUTION. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 26.03.2019. SD/- SD/- (SANJAY ARORA) (N.K.CHOUDHRY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED:26.03.2019 /PK/ PS. COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: (1) SH. MOHD. SH. MOHD SIDIQ MATH, S/O SH. MOHD . ABDULLAH MATH, R/O QAMARWARI, SRINAGAR (2) THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-3(2), SRINAGAR (3) THE CIT(A), J&K, JAMMU (4) THE CIT CONCERNED (5) THE SR DR, I.T.A.T., AMRITSAR TRUE COPY BY ORDER