M/s. Hewlett Packard Global Soft Private Limited, Bangalore V. ACIT, Bangalore

ITA 1455/BANG/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 130 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8650 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 year(s) 26 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 11-01-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 04-01-2017
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 16-12-2010
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SUDHAKAR RAO
• Assessee Lawyers: SHARATH RAO VAIDEH I G
• Keywords: Business income; Depreciation; Transfer pricing; Opportunity of being heard; Revenue expenditure; Capital expenditure
• Section: 143(3); 37

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRI BUNAL BANGALORE BENCH C, BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI A. K. GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER IT(TP)A NO.1455 (BANG) 2010 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2006-07) M/S HEWLETT-PACKARD GLOBAL SOFT PVT. LTD. NO.139/40, ELECTRONIC CITY PHASE-II, HOSUR ROAD, BANGALORE-560 100 PAN NO.AACCK8428P APPELLANT VS THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-11(4), BANGALORE RESPONDENT ASSESSEE BY : SHRI SHARATH RAO, VAIDEH I G & ANKUR PAI, CA REVENUE BY : SHRI SUDHAKAR RAO, CIT DATE OF HEARING : 04-01-2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 11-01-2017 O R D E R PER SHRI A.K.GARODIA, AM THIS IS AN ASSESSEES APPEAL DIRECTED AGAINST THE A SSESSMENT ORDER DATED 11-10-2010 PASSED BY THE AO U/S 143(3) R.W.S.144C O F THE IT ACT, 1961 AS PER THE DIRECTIONS OF DRP FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07. 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS; TRANSFER PRICING 1. T H E ORDER PASSED B Y T HE H O N O R A BL E D I SP UT E RESO L UT I O N PANE L ( ' DRP ') AND T H E L EARNED ASSESS I NG OFF I CER ( ' AO' ) I T R ANSFE R P RI C IN G OFF I CE R ( ' TPO ') I S NOT I N ACCORDANCE WI TH THE LAW AND IS CONTRARY TO THE FACTS AND C I RCU M S T A N CES OF THE P R ESEN T CASE A N D I N ANY CASE IN VI OLATION OF THE PR I NCIP L E OF EQU I TY A N D NATURA L J UST I CE . 2. TH E HO N O R AB L E DRP AND TH E L EAR NED AO I TPO ERRE D IN F A CT AND IN L A W I N DETE R MI NIN G T HE ARM ' S LENGTH PR IC E ( 'ALP ') BY ADOP TI NG TH E F I N A NCI A L DATA FOR A S I NG L E YEAR [I . E . T HE F I NANC I A L YEAR ( ' FY ' ) 2 005-06] OF THE COM PARAB L ES AS AG AIN S T M ULT I PLE Y EAR DATA CON SI DE RE D BY THE APPELLANT . 3. T H E LE A RN ED TPO H AS E RR ED IN SEL ECTIN G C O M PA NI ES AS CO M PA R AB L E TO TH E APPEL L AN T DES PI TE SUC H C O M PA NI ES FA IL I NG THE TEST OF C O MPARAB I LITY A N D REL I ABILIT Y O N SO M E O R A LL O F T HE FACTORS SUCH AS FUNCT I ONA L D I SS IMI LARI T Y , PROD UC T LE D REV E NU ES A N D L OWE R EM PL O Y EE COST L EVE L S . 4. THE L EA N ED TPO HAS ERRED IN A D OPT ING A F A UL T Y PRO C ESS O F SE L E C T I ON OF CO M PARABLE COMPAN I ES W I THOU T T A KIN G I NT O ACCO UNT ASPEC T S SUCH AS THE INF L U E NC E OF EXTRA OR DIN A RY E V EN T S , ABNO RM AL I TY I N TH E FIN A NCI A L RES ULT S O F THE CONCERNED Y EAR , REL I ABI LI TY OF THE F I N A NCI A L D A TA A ND T H E F A IL U R E O F H IS OW N F I LTERS . 5. THE HO N O R AB L E DRP AND T H E LEARNE D A O I TPO E RR ED IN FA C T AN D I N L AW I N US I N G SELECTIVE I NFO R MATION , WH I CH WAS N O T A VAILA B LE I N PUBLIC DOM A IN , OBT A I N ED UNDER S E C T I O N 1 33 ( 6 ) OF T HE IN CO M E- T A X AC T , 1961 (' T H E A CT ') W I T HOUT ANY I ND E PEND E NT VAL I DAT I ON OF THE DAT A PROVID E D A ND BY I GNO R I N G TH E I NCO NSI STE N C I ES T HEREIN WITH THE I NF O RM A TION A VA IL ABLE I N PUBLIC DOM A I N , I N C LUDING TH E A U D I TED F I NANC I AL S T AT EM E NTS , OF THE C OMPARABLE COMPANIES . 6. T H E LEA RN E D T P O E RR ED IN COMPUT I NG THE OPE R AT I NG M A RG I N S O F TH E C OMPARAB L E CO M PA NI E S A T H I G H E R L E V E L S AND DETE R M INING THE OPER A T I N G M ARG I N OF TH E A PP E LL AN T T O B E L OWE R TH A N TH E M A R G IN ACT U A LLY EA RN ED B Y THE A PP E L L A NT . T HE HON O R A BLE DRP A N D TH E L EA RN ED AO HAVE ERRED IN UPHO L DING T HE SA M E . THE E X ER C I SE OF C OMP UT AT I ON O F M A R G IN S I G N O R ES CER T A I N IT EMS W H I C H O UG H T TO HAVE BEEN CONS I DE RE D AS O P E RA T IN G OR N O N -O P E RAT I N G IT E M S , AS THE CASE M AY B E , AN D AL SO I GNORES RI SK A D JUSTMENTS TO THE MA R GI N S OF THE C OM PARABLE COM PAN I ES 7. TH E H O NOR A BLE D RP AND THE LE A RNED AO/TPO ERR E D IN LAW AND ON FA C TS IN UPHO L D I NG THE ARM ' S LENG T H MARG I N A RR I V ED AT BY THE LEARNED TPO BY NOT CONS I DERING THE LO WER RANGE OF 5 PERCENT FROM THE MEAN MA RG IN AS ALLOWED U NDER THE ACT AND T H E I NCO M E-TA X RULES , 1962 ( ' RULES ' ) . 8. W IT HOUT P REJUD I CE TO AL L O F TH E ABOVE, THE HONORAB L E DRP A N D T HE L EARNED AO/ T PO HAVE ERRED I N FA C TS AND I N L AW IN APP L YING TH E PROV I S I ONS OF TRANSFER PRICI NG T O THE A PPE L L AN T WI T H O U T APP R ECIATING T HE FACT T H AT T H E A P PE L LA NT WAS ENTITLED TO TA X H OL I DAY U NDE R S EC TI O N 10 A OF TH E A C T DURING T HE RE L EVA N T Y EAR AND T HE RE F O R E THERE W OULD BE NOT BE A NY M OT IV E TO S HI F T PROF I T S T O T H E OTHER CO U NT R Y . ADJ U ST ME NT S UNDER THE SECT I ON 10A OF T H E ACT 9. THE H O NOURAB L E D R P AND THE L E ARNED AO H AS E R RED IN LA W AND ON FA C T S I N C O NC LUD IN G TH AT COMMUN I CATIO N EXPE N SES AND EXPEND I TURE INCURRED IN FOR E IGN CU RRE NCY ARE T O BE E XCLU DED F RO M THE E X POR T TU R NOVER FOR THE PURPOSE OF COMPUTA TI O N OF R E L I E F U ND ER TH E SEC T I O N 1 0A O F THE ACT . 10. THE HONOURAB L E DRP AND THE LE ARNED AO H AS ERRED IN L A W A N D ON FACTS IN UPHOLDING TH A T TH E SA I D COM MU N IC AT I ON E X PENSE S AND E X PEND I TU R E I NC U RRED IN F O R E IGN CURR EN CY S HO ULD NO T B E R E D U CED F R OM THE T OTAL TURNOVER FOR TH E PURPOSE OF COMP U TATIO N OF R EL IEF UNDER SEC T I ON 1 0A OF TH E ACT EVEN I F THESE AR E RED UC E D FROM TH E E X P OR T TURN O V E R . 11. WIT H OUT PRE J UD IC E TO T HE GROU N D ABOVE , T HE HONOUR A BLE DRP AND THE LEA R NE D A O HA S ERR ED I N LAW AND O N FA CTS IN UPHO L DING THAT T H E R E LI EF U N D ER SE CT ION 10A OF T H E ACT I S T O B E COMPU T ED AF T E R S ETT I N G O F F LOSSES I NCURRED BY C E R TAIN U NDERT AKINGS AS AGA INS T CO MPUT I NG RE L IEF FO R EAC H UN D E R T A KI NG SEPA R A T ELY OTHERS 12. TH E H ONOURAB L E DRP AND TH E L EARNED AO HAVE ER R ED I N HOLD I NG I NTEREST INCOME EARN E D BY THE AP PE L L ANT AS ' I NCO M E F RO M OT HE R S OU RCES ' A N D REJ ECT I NG T H E AP P E L L ANT ' S ARG U MENT TO CONSIDER THE SA ME AS ' P R O F I TS OR G A INS F R OM BUS I NESS OR P R O F ESSION ' . I N DO I NG S O , THE HO N ORAB LE DR P I L EA R NED A O HAV E FAI LE D TO CONS ID E R T H E DEC I S I ON O F T HE I N CO ME - TA X A P P EL L ATE T R I B U NA L (' I T A 1 ') I N TH E APPEL L AN T ' S OW N C ASE ON TH E SAM E AS P ECT 13. T HE L E A RN E D A O H A S E R R E D I N L AW I N CONCLUDI N G TH A T E X PENSES I NCURRED BY T HE A P P E L L A NT TO WA RDS PURC H ASE O F COMP U T ER S OF T WAR E A L O NG W I T H RELA TE D HA R DWA R E , W H I C H ARE N OT O F ENDU RI NG NATURE , A S CAP I TAL I N NATURE A N D T H E R E FORE NOT B E I NG E L IG IB L E F O R DEDUCTION U N D ER SE C T I ON 37 OF TH E AC T B UT ON L Y E N TITLED TO D E P R EC I A T I ON A T 60 P E R CENT . CONSEQUENTIAL GROUNDS 14. THE L EARNED AO H AS E RR E D IN NOT GRANTI N G A H I GHER F O R E IGN T AX CRED IT BASED ON THE ASSESSED I NCO M E . 15. THE HONO URABLE DRP A N D T H E L EA RN E D AO I TPO H AS ERRED IN LAW A ND ON F A CTS IN L E VYING I NT E REST UNDER SECT I O N 2348 AND SECT I O N 23 4 0 OF THE ACT . THE APPEL L ANT CRAVES L EA V E TO ADD, ALTER , VARY, OMIT , SUBSTITUT E O R AMEND THE ABOVE G R OUNDS , AT ANY TIME BEFORE OR AT THE TIME OF HEARING OF THE APPEAL . E ACH OF T H E ABOVE OBJECTION S IS INDEPENDENT AND W I THOUT PR EJU D ICE T O THE OTHER GROUNDS PREFERRE D BY T HE APPEL L ANT . THE APPE L LAN T -COMPA NY DOE S NOT HAVE A MANAGING DIREC T OR AND H E NCE THESE C O N C I SE G RO UN DS O F APPEA L S A R E S I GNED BY THE D I REC T O R O F THE C OMPANY IN ACCORDANCE WITH TH E P R O VI S I ONS OF THE ACT AS PER LETTER DATED 17-11-2014, THE GROUNDS RAISED ARE 15 AS REPRODUCED ABOVE. SUBSEQUENTLY, THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED ANOTHER LETTER DATED 25-10-2016 FILED ON 10-11-2016 AS PER WHICH IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT GROUN D NO.1 TO 8 PERTAIN TO TP ADJUSTMENT ARE NOT PRESSED AND ADDITIONAL GROUNDS R AISED EARLIER VIDE LETTER DATED 17-11-2014 ARE WITHDRAWN. ACCORDINGLY, THESE GROUNDS ARE REJECTED AS NOT PRESSED/ WITHDRAWN. 3. REGARDING GROUND NO.9 & 10 IN RESPECT OF DEDUCT ION U/S 10A OF THE IT ACT, IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE LD. AR OF THE ASSESSEE THAT THIS ISSUE IS COVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE BY THE JUDGMENT OF THE HONB LE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT RENDERED IN THE CASE OF M/S TATA ELXSI LTD. AS REPO RTED IN 349 ITR 98. 4. REGARDING GROUND NO.11, HE SUBMITTED THAT THIS ISSUE IS COVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE BY THE JUDGMENT OF THE HONB LE APEX HIGH COURT RENDERED IN THE CASE OF M/S YOKOGAWA INDIA LTD. HE ALSO SUB MITTED A COPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THE HONBLE APEX COURT IN CIVIL APPEAL NO.8498 OF 2013 DATED 16- 12-2016 IN THE CASE OF YOKOGAWA LTD., AS PER WHICH THE JUDGMENT OF HONBLE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT HAS BEEN UPHELD BY THE HONBLE APEX COURT AND IN VIEW OF THIS, GROUND NO.11 OF THE APPEAL SHOULD ALSO BE ALLOWED. 5. REGARDING GROUND NO.12, HE SUBMITTED THAT THIS ISSUE IS COVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESEE BY THE TRIBUNAL ORDER IN ASSE SSEES OWN CASE FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2001-02 IN ITA NO.122 (B)/2004 DATE D 27-06-2007. HE SUBMITTED A COPY OF THIS TRIBUNAL ORDER. HE POINTE D OUT THAT THE ISSUE INVOLVED IN THIS GROUND IS REGARDING THE HEAD OF INCOME UNDE R WHICH THE INTEREST INCOME HAS TO BE TAXED AS TO WHETHER IT SHOULD BE TAXED UN DER THE HEAD INCOME FROM BUSINESS OR UNDER THE HEAD INCOME FROM OTHER SOU RCES. AT THIS JUNCTURE, A QUERY WAS RAISED BY THE BENCH AS TO WHETHER CHANGE OF HEAD FOR TAXING INTEREST INCOME WILL HAVE ANY IMPACT ON THE AMOUNT OF TAX PA YABLE BY THE ASSESSEE AND IN REPLY, IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE LD. AR OF THE ASS ESSEE THAT IN THE PRESENT YEAR AT LEAST, THERE WILL BE NO IMPACT BUT THE ASSESSEE WANTS TO KEEP THE ISSUE ALIVE. THE BENCH OPINED THAT IF THIS ISSUE HAS NO IMPACT O N THE TAX LIABILITY OF THE ASSESSEE IN THE PRESENT YEAR THEN AT LEAST IN THE P RESENT YEAR, THIS ISSUE IS OF ACADEMIC INTEREST ONLY AND THEREFORE, WE DO NOT WAN T TO ENTER INTO THIS ASPECT OF THE MATTER IN THE PRESENT YEAR BECAUSE OF THIS REAS ON THAT IN THE PRESENT YEAR, THIS ASPECT IS OF ACADEMIC INTEREST ONLY. IN REPL Y, THE LD. AR OF THE ASSESSEE HAD NOTHING TO SAY. 6. REGARDING GROUND NO.13, HE SUBMITTED THAT ALTHO UGH, THIS MAY BE CORRECT THAT THE EXPENSES ON PURCHASE OF COMPUTER S OFTWARE ALONG WITH RELATED HARD WARE IS NOT ALLOWABLE AS A REVENUE EXPENDITURE U/S 37 OF THE IT ACT AND ONLY DEPRECIATION IS ALLOWABLE AT THE RATE OF 60%, BUT THE RESULTING DISALLOWANCE SHOULD BE ADDED TO THE PROFIT OF THE ASSESSEE COMPA NY FOR COMPUTATION OF DEDUCTION ALLOWABLE U/S 10A OF THE IT ACT, 1961. 7. REGARDING GROUND NO.14, HE SUBMITTED THAT THE I SSUE REGARDING GRANTING OF FOREIGN TAX CREDIT MAY BE RESTORED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE AO FOR FRESH DECISION. AT THIS JUNCTURE, A QUERY WAS RAISED BY THE BENCH AS TO WHETHER THE INCOME IN RESPECT OF WHICH THE ASSESSEE IS CLAIMING FOREIGN TAX CREDIT HAS BEEN BROUGHT TO TAX IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE IN THE PRESENT YEAR IN INDIA OR WHETHER THE SAME WAS CONSIDERED AS ELIGIBLE FOR EXE MPTION. IN REPLY, IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE LD. AR OF THE ASSESSEE THAT THIS A SPECT OF THE MATTER MAY BE ALSO BE RESTORED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE AO FOR FRE SH DECISION WITH DIRECTION TO AO TO ALLOW FOREIGN TAX CREDIT ONLY IN RESPECT OF THOS E INCOMES WHICH WERE TAXED IN FOREIGN COUNTRY AND ON WHICH NO EXEMPTION IS CLAIME D OR ALLOWED IN INDIA. 8. AS AGAINST THIS, THE LD. DR OF THE REVENUE SUPP ORTED THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. 9. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. GROUN D NO.1 TO 8 AND ADDITIONAL GROUNDS ARE REJECTED AS WITHDRAWN. 10. GROUND NO.9 & 10 ARE ALLOWED BY RESPECTFULLY F OLLOWING THE JUDGMENT OF THE HONBLE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT RENDERED IN THE CASE OF M/S TATA ELXSI LTD. (SUPRA) WHEREIN IT WAS HELD BY THE HONBLE HIG H COURT THAT THE TOTAL TURNOVER IS SUM TOTAL OF EXPORT TURNOVER AND DOMEST IC TURNOVER AND THEREFORE, IF AN AMOUNT IS REDUCED FROM EXPORT TURNOVER THEN THE TOTAL TURNOVER ALSO AUTOMATICALLY GOES DOWN BY THE SAME AMOUNT. WE DIR ECT THE AO THAT THE EXPENSES HE HAS REDUCED FROM THE EXPORT TURNOVER SH OULD ALSO BE REDUCED FROM THE TOTAL TURNOVER FOR THE PURPOSE OF COMPUTATION O F DEDUCTION ALLOWABLE U/S 10A OF THE ACT. THESE GROUNDS ARE ALLOWED IN THI S MANNER. 11. GROUND NO.11 IS ALSO ALLOWED BY RESPECTFULLY F OLLOWING THE JUDGMENT OF THE HONBLE HIGH COURT RENDERED IN THE CASE OF M /S YOKOGAWA INDIA LTD (SUPRA) WHICH HAS BEEN APPROVED BY THE HONBLE APEX COURT. 12. REGARDING GROUND NO.12, IN VIEW OF THIS ADMITT ED POSITION THAT THIS DISPUTE AS TO WHETHER INTEREST INCOME IS ASSESSED U NDER THE HEAD INCOME FROM BUSINESS OR INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES IS NOT HA VING ANY IMPACT ON THE TAX LIABILITY OF THE ASSESSEE IN THE PRESENT YEAR, WE H OLD THAT THIS ISSUE IS ONLY OF ACADEMIC INTEREST IN THE PRESENT YEAR AND WE DO NOT ENTER INTO THIS ASPECT IN THE PRESENT YEAR AND THE SAME IS LEFT OPEN FOR A DE CISION IN A LATER YEAR WHERE IT WILL HAVE AN IMPACT ON THE TAX LIABILITY OF THE ASS ESSEE. 13. REGARDING GROUND NO.13, WE HOLD THAT THE EXPEN DITURE INCURRED ON PURCHASE OF COMPUTER SOFTWARE ALONG WITH RELATED HA RDWARE IS NOT ALLOWABLE AS REVENUE EXPENDITURE U/S 37 OF THE IT ACT AND ONLY D EPRECIATION THEREON IS ALLOWABLE AS PER THE APPLICABLE RATE BUT THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE SHOULD BE CONSIDERED AFTER MAKING THIS DISALLOWANCE FOR THE P URPOSE OF COMPUTING DEDUCTION ALLOWABLE TO THE ASSESSEE U/S 10A OF THE IT ACT BECAUSE IN OUR CONSIDERED OPINION, IF AN AMOUNT IS NOT ALLOWABLE O N THE BASIS OF THIS DISPUTE THAT IT IS CAPITAL EXPENDITURE AND NOT REVENUE EXPE NDITURE THEN IT HAS TO BE ACCEPTED THAT THE ACTUAL BUSINESS INCOME WAS THE IN COME ASSESSED AFTER MAKING SUCH DISALLOWANCE AND THE SAME SHOULD BE CON SIDERED FOR THE PURPOSE OF COMPUTING THE DEDUCTION ALLOWABLE U/S 10A OF THE IT ACT, 1961. 14. REGARDING GROUND NO.14, WE RESTORE THE MATTER REGARDING GRANTING OF FOREIGN TAX CREDIT TO THE ASSESSEE TO THE FILE OF T HE AO FOR A FRESH DECISION WITH THE DIRECTION THAT IF IT IS ESTABLISHED BY THE ASSE SSEE THAT AN INCOME WAS TAXED IN A FOREIGN COUNTRY AND THE SAME WAS ALSO TAXED IN INDIA AND ON SUCH INCOME, NO EXEMPTION WAS CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE IN INDIA T HEN FOREIGN TAX PAID IN A FOREIGN COUNTRY SHOULD BE CONSIDERED FOR FOREIGN TA X CREDIT AS PER LAW. THE AO SHOULD PASS NECESSARY ORDER AS PER LAW ON THIS ASPE CT AFTER PROVIDING ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. THE IS SUE INVOLVED IN GROUND NO.15 IN RESPECT OF CHARGEABILITY OF INTEREST IS CONSEQUE NTIAL IN NATURE FOR WHICH NO SEPARATE ADJUDICATION IS CALLED FOR. 15. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS P ARTLY ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THE DATE MENT IONED ON THE CAPTION PAGE. (VIJAY PAL RAO) (A.K. GARODIA) JUDICAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER PLACE: BANGALORE: D A T E D : .01.2017 AM * COPY TO : 1 APPELLANT 2 RESPONDENT 3 CIT(A)-II BANGALORE 4 CIT 5 DR, ITAT, BANGALORE. 6 GUARD FILE BY ORDER, AR, ITAT, BANGALORE 1. DATE OF DICTATION 2. , , DATE ON WHICH TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICT ATING MEMBER .. 3. !' # . $ %# / $ %# # & DATE ON WHICH THE APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE PS/SR .PS. 4. ''() & * + DATE ON WHICH THE ORDER IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTAT ING MEMBER FOR PRONOUNCEMENT 5. * . %# / # . . %# # + DATE ON WHICH THE ORDER COMES BACK TO THE PS/SR.PS .. 6 * !', + DATE OF UPLOADING THE ORDER ON WEBSITE .. 7. ! !', ' , - ) IF NOT UPLOADED, FURNISH THE REASON FOR DOING SO . 8. .% / 0 + DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE BENCH CLERK .. 9. * 1'2 / 34 & 5 + DATE ON WHICH ORDER GOES FOR XEROX &ENDORSEMENT 10. 0 6 / + DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK 11. * 7 & 0 8 + THE DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE ASSISTANT RE GISTRAR FOR SIGNATURE ON THE ORDER . 12. !) * 9() & 0 9() /#5 . + THE DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO DESPATCH SECTION FOR DESPATCH OF THE TRIBUNAL ORDER 13. * 9() + DATE OF DESPATCH OF ORDER .