The ACIT-CC-1, Baroda V. M/s. Navjivan Trust, Dahod

ITA 2693/AHD/2009

• Counselvise Citation: [2013] 120 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0413 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 5 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 22-03-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 21-01-2013
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 29-09-2009
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: D C PATWARI SHRI S N SOPARKAR
• Keywords: Loose papers; Maximum Marginal Rate; Benefit of exemption
• Section: 143(3); 12; 11

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH, AHMEDABAD , .. , '# ' $ BEFORE SHRI MUKUL KR.SHRAWAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI T.R.MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER APPEAL(S) / CO(S) BY SL.NO(S) ITA NO(S)/COS. ASST.YEAR(S) APPELLANT(S ) RESPONDENT(S) 1. 2693/AHD/2009 2006-07 ASST.CIT CC-1 BARODA M/S.NAVJIVAN TRUST M/S.NAVJIVAN ROLLER FLOUR & PULSE MILLS PVT.LTD. KUMBHARWADA, OPP.MARKET YARD, DAHOD PAN: AAATN 1783 F 2. 2694/AHD/2009 2007-08 REVENUE ASSESSEE 3. CO.257/AHD/09 (OUT OF ITA NO. 2693/AHD/2009) 2006-07 ASSESSEE REVENUE 4. CO.258/AHD/09 (OUT OF ITA NO. 2694/AHD/2009) 2007-08 ASSESSEE REVENUE REVENUE BY : SHRI D.C.PATWARI, CIT-DR ASSESSEE BY : SHRI S.N.SOPARKAR / DATE OF HEARING : 14/03/2013 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 22/3/13 / O R D E R PER BENCH : THESE TWO APPEALS HAVE BEEN FILED BY THE REVENUE AR ISING FROM THE ORDERS OF LD.CIT(A)-IV, AHMEDABAD BOTH DAT ED 10/07/2009. THE REVENUE HAS CHALLENGED THE RELIEF GRANTED BY LD.CIT(A) IN AN IDENTICALLY WORDED GROUND OF APPEAL , REPRODUCED BELOW:- 1) THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON ACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF ITA NOS.2693,1694/AHD/2009 (BY REVENUE) AND CO NOS.257 & 258/AHD/2009 (BY ASSESSEE) ASST.CIT VS. M/S.NAVJIVAN TRUST ASST.YEARS - 2006-07 & 2007-08 - 2 - RS.10,90,356/- ( RS.10,27,683/- FOR A.Y. 2007-08 ) ON ACCOUNT OF EXEMPTION CLAIMED U/S.11 & 12 OF THE I.T. ACT, 1 961. 2. FACTS IN BRIEF AS EMERGED FROM THE CORRESPONDING LEAD ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07 DISCUSSED IN AN ORDER PASSE D U/S.153A R.W.S. 143(3) DATED 30/12/2008 WERE THAT THE ASSESS EE IS A TRUST WHICH WAS SUBJECTED TO THE PROCEEDINGS U/S.153A IN CONSEQUENCE OF A SEARCH U/S.132 CONDUCTED ON NAVJIVAN GROUP. T HE ASSESSEE- TRUST HAS FURNISHED A RETURN OF LOSS OF (-)RS.8,72, 193/- IN COMPLIANCE OF THE NOTICE. THE ISSUE IS IN RESPECT OF A FIXED DEPOSIT OF THE TRUST WHICH WAS FOUND PLEDGED WITH THE BANK. THE FACTS IN THIS REGARD AS NOTED BY THE AO IN PARAGRAPH 5 IS REPRODUCED FOR TH E SAKE OF CLARITY AS UNDER: 5. DURING THE COURSE OF SURVEY ACTION AT THE BUSI NESS PREMISES OF NAVJIVAN ROLLER FLOUR & PULSE MILLS PVT .LTD., ANNEXURE A/5 WAS IMPOUNDED AND ON VERIFICATION, IT WAS FOUND THAT THE TRUSTEES AND THE DIRECTORS OF THE TRUST AR E COMMON. IT WAS FURTHER FOUND THAT THE COMPANY IN WHICH THE TRU STEES ARE ALSO DIRECTORS HAVE PLEDGE THE FIXED DEPOSIT OF THE TRUST OF DAHOD URBAN BANK FOR THE LOAN TAKEN UP BY THE COMPA NY FOR THEIR BUSINESS PURPOSE. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE FACTS THE ASSESSEE WAS ACCORDINGLY ASKED TO EXPLAIN AS TO WHY IT SHOUL D NOT BE HELD THAT THE FIXED DEPOSIT OF THE TRUST (ASSESSEE) PLEDGE BY THE COMPANY WHERE THE TRUSTEES ARE THE DIRECTORS FOR IT S SECURITY OF ITS LOAN TAKEN IS UNDER THE PROHIBITED CATEGORY WITHIN THE MEANING OF SECTION 13(2)(A) AND SINCE INCOME OR PRO PERTY OF THE TRUST HAD BEEN USED FOR SUCH PERSON FOR ANY TIM E DURING THE PREVIOUS RELEVANT YEAR AND ADEQUATE INTEREST, T HE LEGAL FICTION IN SUB SECTION (2) OF THE SECTION 13 WOULD COME INTO PLAY AND THE INCOME OR PROPERTY OF THE TRUST SHALL FOR THE PURPOSE OF CLAUSE (D) OF SUB-SECTION (1) OF SECTION 13, BE ITA NOS.2693,1694/AHD/2009 (BY REVENUE) AND CO NOS.257 & 258/AHD/2009 (BY ASSESSEE) ASST.CIT VS. M/S.NAVJIVAN TRUST ASST.YEARS - 2006-07 & 2007-08 - 3 - DEEMED TO HAVE BEEN APPLIED FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE PROHIBITED CATEGORY OF THE PERSONS UNDER SUB SECTION (3). CON SEQUENTLY VIDE ORDER SHEET DATED 15/12/2008 A SHOW CAUSE WAS GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE THAT AS TO WHY CLAIM OF THE BENEFIT OF EXEMPTION UNDER SECTION 11 SHOULD NOT BE REJECTED. 2.1. ON THE BASIS OF SAID INFORMATION, IT WAS HELD BY THE AO THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD MADE AVAILABLE A SUM OF RS.1,31,66 ,487/- DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE PERSONS. ACCO RDING TO AO, THE COMPANY IN WHICH THOSE PERSONS WERE INTERESTED WERE ALLOWED TO USE THE FIXED DEPOSITS AS A SECURITY AND THE BENEFI T WAS OBTAINED BY THOSE SPECIFIC PERSONS. ACCORDING TO AO, IN CAS E OF DEFAULT, THE FIXED DEPOSITS OF THE TRUST WHICH WERE LYING AS A G UARANTEE WITH THE BANK; WOULD HAVE BEEN ENCASHED THEREFORE THE TRUST HAS ALLOWED TO USE ITS FIXED DEPOSITS/ASSETS DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTL Y FOR THE COMPANY. DUE TO THIS REASON, THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 13(1) (C) HAVE BEEN INVOKED BY THE ASSESSEE. AFTER INVOCATION OF THOSE SECTION, THE AO HAS HELD THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT ENTITLED FOR THE CLAIM OF EXEMPTION U/S.11 OF IT ACT. AN ADDITION WAS MADE I N THE FOLLOWING MANNER:- 7. THE TRUST HAS ALSO CLAIMED DONATION EXPENSES O F RS.19,52,178/- BEING EXPENSES INCURRED FOR THE OBJE CTS OF TRUST. SINCE THE ASSESSEE CLAIM OF EXEMPTION U/S.11 HAS BE EN FORFEITED, THESE INCOME AMOUNTING TO RS.10,90,356/- (RS.12,70,346/- + RS.225 + RS.17,71,963/- MINUS RS.19,52,178/- ARE HELD TO BE ASSESSEES TOTAL INCO ME CHARGEABLE TO TAX AT MAXIMUM MARGINAL RATE. ITA NOS.2693,1694/AHD/2009 (BY REVENUE) AND CO NOS.257 & 258/AHD/2009 (BY ASSESSEE) ASST.CIT VS. M/S.NAVJIVAN TRUST ASST.YEARS - 2006-07 & 2007-08 - 4 - 3. IN AN IDENTICAL MANNER, FOR AY 2007-08 THE BENEF IT OF EXEMPTION U/S.11 WAS DENIED AND THE IMPUGNED ADDITI ON WAS MADE. 4. WHEN THE MATTER WAS CARRIED BEFORE THE FIRST APP ELLATE AUTHORITY, LD.CIT(A) HAS TAKEN THE VIEW IN ASSESSEE S FAVOUR AS PER THE FOLLOWING PARAGRAPH:- 3.5. I HAVE CONSIDERED THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AND TH E ABOVE CONTENTIONS OF THE APPELLANT. IT IS SEEN THAT THE LEARNED A.O. HAS DISALLOWED THE CLAIM FOR EXEMPTION U/S.11 AND 1 2 OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, MAINLY ON THE GROUND THAT THE SEIZE D LOOSE PAPERS FOUND FROM NVJIVAN ROLLER FLOUR & PULSE MILL S LTD. INDICATED THE DETAILS ABOUT OVERDRAFT FROM BANK AND IN ORDER TO SECURE THE OVERDRAFT FIXED DEPOSIT RECEIPTS OF T HE APP WERE PLEDGED WITH THE BAN AND NAVJIVAN ROLLER FLOUR & PU LSE MILLS LTD. IS COVERED IN TERMS OF SECTION 13(3) OF THE I. T.ACT. THEREFORE, ACCORDING TO HIM IT WAS USE OF PROPERTY OF THE TRUST FOR THE BENEFIT OF PERSONS REFERRED TO IN SECTION 1 3(3) AS ENVISAGED BY SECTION 13(1)(C)(II) OF THE ACT. THE APPELLANTS CONTENTIONS ARE THAT SEIZED PAPER DOES NOT INDICATE ANYTHING WHICH WOULD SHOW THAT THE BANK OVERDRAFT BORROWED B Y NAVJIVAN ROLLER FLOUR & PULSE MILLS LTD. WAS SECURE D BY WAY OF PLEDGE OF BANK FD OF THE APPELLANT. NOR DOES IT CONTAINS ANY DETAILS OF FD BELONGING TO THE APPELLANT PLEDGE D WITH THE BANK, AS ALLEGED BY THE A.O. IT IS THE EXPLANATION OF THE APPELLANT THAT OVERDRAFT WAS SECURED BY PERSONAL GU ARANTEE OF THE DIRECTORS OF THE COMPANY AND THAT IT WAS CLEAN OVERDRAFT AND NO ENCUMBRANCE OF ANY PERSON OTHER THAN THE COM PANY AND ITS DIRECTORS WERE CREATED. IT IS ALSO SHOWN T HAT NO LETTER OF PLEDGE OR DISCHARGE OF DEPOSIT WAS EXECUTED WITH REFERENCE TO THE DEPOSITS OF THE APPELLANT TRUST WHICH IS NOR MALLY PROCESS FOR PLEDGE IN CASE OF BORROWING FROM BANK. THIS FA CT WAS ALSO ITA NOS.2693,1694/AHD/2009 (BY REVENUE) AND CO NOS.257 & 258/AHD/2009 (BY ASSESSEE) ASST.CIT VS. M/S.NAVJIVAN TRUST ASST.YEARS - 2006-07 & 2007-08 - 5 - CONFIRMED BY THE BANK IN REPLY TO THE NOTICE OF THE A.O. WHEN IT WAS STATED BY THE BANK THAT THE LOAN WAS GIVEN O N THE BASIS OF PERSONAL GUARANTEES OF THE DIRECTORS OF THE COMP ANY MR.INDRAVADAN SHETH, MR.SHIRISHBHAI SHETH AND MR.SAILESHBHAI SHETH. IT WAS STATED BY THE BANK TH E DEPOSITS WERE KEPT WITH THEM ONLY FOR THE SAKE OF RECORD IN THEIR CUSTODY. IT IS ALSO CLARIFIED THAT THE DEPOSITS WE RE NEVER USED OR BROKEN FOR ANY PAYMENT OF INTEREST OR REPAYMENT OF LOAN TO THE BANK. IT IS ALSO CLEARLY STATED BEFORE THE A.O . THAT THE DEPOSITS WERE ENTIRELY REPAID TO THE TRUST ON MATUR ITY AND THE INTEREST THEREON WAS PAID TO THE TRUST. CONSIDERIN G THE ABOVE FACTS IT IS NOT CORRECT TO PRESUME THAT THE DEPOSIT S WERE PLEDGED WITH BANK AND THAT IT WAS UTILIZATION OF FU NDS OF THE TRUST FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE PERSONS COVERED U/S.13 OF I.T.ACT. NO DETAILS OF FDS OF THE TRUST WHICH MIGHT HAVE BEE N PLEDGED AS PER THE A.O., IS FOUND IN THE SAID LOOSE PAPER N OR ANY OTHER LOOSE PAPER OR DETAILS ARE FOUND TO SHOW THAT ANY O F THE FDS OF THE TRUST ARE PLEDGED AGAINST THE OVERDRAFT FACI LITY AVAILED BY THE SAID COMPANY. THE EXEMPTION CANNOT BE DENIE D WITHOUT ACTUAL UTILIZATION OF THE FIXED DEPOSITS OF THE APP ELLANT BY THE TRUSTEES FOR ANY REPAYMENT OF LOAN TAKEN BY THE COM PANY IN WHICH TRUSTEES ARE THE DIRECTORS SINCE THERE IS NO EVIDENCE ON RECORDS THAT THESE FDRS WERE ACTUALLY PLEDGED WITH THE BANK IN LIEU OF LOAN TAKEN BY THE COMPANY WHICH HAS ALSO BEEN CONFIRMED BY THE BANK BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER. KEEPING IN VIEW OF ABOVE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E, IT IS EVIDENT THAT THE FUNDS OF THE APPELLANT WERE NOT UT ILIZED DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE PERSO NS REFERRED TO IN SECTION 13(3) OF THE I.T.ACT, 1961. HENCE, THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 13(3) R.W.S. 13(1)(C) ARE NOT ATTRACTED IN THE PRESENT CASE. THEREFORE, THE APPELLANT IS ELIGIBLE FOR THE EXEMPTION CLAIMED U/S.11 AND 12 OF THE IT ACT, 1961 AND ASSES SING OFFICER IS DIRECTED ACCORDINGLY. IN THE RESULT, SE COND GROUND OF APPEAL IS ALLOWED. ITA NOS.2693,1694/AHD/2009 (BY REVENUE) AND CO NOS.257 & 258/AHD/2009 (BY ASSESSEE) ASST.CIT VS. M/S.NAVJIVAN TRUST ASST.YEARS - 2006-07 & 2007-08 - 6 - 5. PARTIES HEARD. CASE RECORD PERUSED. AT THE OUT SET, OUR ATTENTION HAS BEEN DRAWN ON A LETTER CALLED U/S.133 (6) OF IT ACT FROM THE SAID BANK DATED 27/12/2008, CONTENTS REPRODUCED BELOW:- TO MR.R.K.DHANESTA ASST.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 6 TH FLOOR, AYAKAR BHAVAN CENTRAL CIRCLE-I BARODA REF : LETTER NO.ACIT, CC.1/133(6)/08-09 DTD.19.12. 2008 DEAR SIR, THIS IS WITH REFERENCE TO ABOVE LETTER, WE HAVE TO STATE AS UNDER: LOAN TO NAVJIVAN ROLLER FLOUR & PULSE MILLS LTD. DA HOD WAS GIVEN PRIMARILY ON THE BASIS OF PERSONAL GUARANTEES OF FOLLOWING DIRECTORS OF NAVJIVAN ROLLER FLOUR & PULS E MILLS LTD., MR.INDRAVADAN G.SHETH MR.SHIRISHBHAI G.SHETH MR.SHAILESHBHAI G.SHETH ONLY FOR THE SAKE OF RECORD THE FIXED DEPOSIT RECEI PTS OF TRUST WERE RETAINED IN OUR CUSTODY FOR THE PERIOD FROM 25 .04.2005 TO 29.12.2005, AND 17.04.2006 TO 29.08.2006. THIS IS TO FURTHER STATE THAT THE FDR OF THE TRUST WERE KEPT INTACT AND NOT BROKEN AND WERE RETURNED TO THE TRUS T INTACT I.E. NO FUNDS OF THE TRUST WERE USED OR DIVERTED TO THE NAVJIVAN ROLLER FLOUR & PULSE MILLS LTD., DAHOLD. ITA NOS.2693,1694/AHD/2009 (BY REVENUE) AND CO NOS.257 & 258/AHD/2009 (BY ASSESSEE) ASST.CIT VS. M/S.NAVJIVAN TRUST ASST.YEARS - 2006-07 & 2007-08 - 7 - IT FURTHER DETAILS REQUIRED, KINDLY INFORM US THE S AME. THANKING YOU, YOURS FAITHFULLY, FOR THE DAHOD URBAN CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. 5.1. THIS LETTER WAS ISSUED BY THE BANK IN COMPLIAN CE OF A NOTICE/INFORMATION SOUGHT U/S.133(6) OF IT ACT DATE D 19.12.2008. ON THE BASIS OF ABOVE INFORMATION, IT IS ARGUED BEF ORE US THAT PRIMARILY THE DIRECTORS WERE THE GUARANTORS IN RESP ECT OF A LOAN GRANTED TO NAVJIVAN ROLLER FLOUR & PULSE MILLS LTD. FURTHER OUR ATTENTION HAS ALSO BEEN DRAWN THAT THOSE FIXED DEPO SITS WERE ONLY RETAINED IN THE CUSTODY OF THE BANK FOR THE SAKE OF RECORD AND THOSE FDRS WERE KEPT INTACT AND WERE NOT BROKEN. IT HAS ALSO BEEN BROUGHT TO OUR NOTICE THAT THOSE FDRS WERE RETURNED AS SUCH TO THE TRUST. RATHER, THE BANK HAS CERTIFIED THAT THE TRU STS FUNDS WERE NOT USED BY THE BANK. IN THE LIGHT OF THE ABOVE FACTS , WE HAVE PERUSED THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 13(1)(C) OF IT ACT. THIS SECTION SAYS THAT NOTHING CONTAINED IN SECTION 11 OR SECTION 12 SHALL OPERATE SO AS TO EXCLUDE FROM THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE PREVIOUS YEAR OF THE PERSON IN RECEIPT THEREOF IF ANY PART OF SUCH INCOME OR ANY P ROPERTY OF THE TRUST IS DURING THE YEAR USED OR APPLIED DIRECTLY OR INDI RECTLY FOR THE BENEFIT OF ANY PERSON REFERRED TO IN SUB-SECTION(3) . THEREFORE, THE FUNDAMENTAL QUESTION IS THAT UNDER A SITUATION WHEN FDRS ALTHOUGH RETAINED BY THE BANK BUT RETURNED UNTOUCHED CAN BE SAID TO BE USED OR APPLIED FOR THE BENEFIT OF ANY OF THE SPECIFIED PERSONS. WE ARE OF ITA NOS.2693,1694/AHD/2009 (BY REVENUE) AND CO NOS.257 & 258/AHD/2009 (BY ASSESSEE) ASST.CIT VS. M/S.NAVJIVAN TRUST ASST.YEARS - 2006-07 & 2007-08 - 8 - THE VIEW THAT THIS IS NOT A CASE WHERE ANY PROPERTY OF THE TRUST IS DIVERTED FOR THE BENEFIT OF SUCH SPECIFIED PERSONS. WE ARE AWARE OF THE WORDINGS OF THIS SECTION WHICH ALSO SUBSCRIBE T HAT FOR THE PURPOSE OF THE APPLICATION OF THESE CLAUSES THE INC OME ON PROPERTY IS REQUIRED TO BE DIVERTED IN FAVOUR OF ANY PERSON REF ERRED TO IN SUB- SECTION(3). WE HEREBY HOLD THAT THIS IS NOT THE CA SE WHERE THE FDRS WERE EVER DIVERTED IN FAVOUR OF THE PERSONS DESCRIB ED UNDER SUB- SECTION (3) OF THIS SECTION. EVEN ON THE BASIS OF THE SEIZED MATERIAL, THE REVENUE HAS NOT RECOVERED ANY SUCH MATERIAL OR EVIDENCE THROUGH WHICH IT COULD BE ESTABLISHED THAT EITHER T HE FDRS WERE USED OR APPLIED OR DIVERTED BY THE INTERESTED PERSO NS. FURTHER, THE BANK HAS CLARIFIED THE ACTUAL HAPPENING OF THE EVEN T THAT THOSE FDRS WERE RETAINED IN THE CUSTODY OF THE BANK AND L ATER ON RETURNED TO THE TRUST INTACT AND NO FUND WAS DIVERTED. ON THESE FACTS, A SAFE CONCLUSION CAN BE DRAWN THAT THE AO HAD GONE WRONG IN INVOKING THE PROVISION OF SECTION 13(1)(C) AND ALSO WRONGLY DENIED THE BENEFIT OF EXEMPTION U/S.11 AS CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE. RE SULTANTLY, WE HEREBY AFFIRM THE FACTUAL AS ALSO LEGAL FINDING OF LD.CIT(A). GROUNDS RAISED BY THE REVENUE ARE HEREBY DISMISSED. CROSS OBJECTION NOS.257 & 258/AHD/2009 AYS 2006-07 & 2007- 08 RESPECTIVELY 6. CROSS OBJECTIONS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR THESE TWO YEARS ARE ON TECHNICAL GROUND IN RESPECT OF THE INITIATION OF PROCEEDINGS U/S.153A OF THE IT ACT, HOWEVER, CONSIDERING THE LA TEST POSITION OF ITA NOS.2693,1694/AHD/2009 (BY REVENUE) AND CO NOS.257 & 258/AHD/2009 (BY ASSESSEE) ASST.CIT VS. M/S.NAVJIVAN TRUST ASST.YEARS - 2006-07 & 2007-08 - 9 - LAW, IT WAS DECIDED BY THE LD.AR NOT TO PRESS THE S AME, HENCE HEREBY DISMISSED BEING WITHDRAWN. 7. IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE APPEALS OF THE REVENUE A S ALSO THE CROSS OBJECTIONS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE DISMISSE D. SD/- SD/- ( .. ) ( ) ( T.R. MEENA ) ( MUKUL KR. SHRAWAT ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER AHMEDABAD; DATED 22/ 3 /2013 .., . ../ T.C. NAIR, SR. PS '& ' ()* +'*, / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. '#$% / THE APPELLANT 2. &'$% / THE RESPONDENT. 3. ()(*+ , / CONCERNED CIT 4. , ('#) / THE CIT(A)-IV, AHMEDABAD 5. /01 & *+, '# '*+, '2) / DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. 134 5 / GUARD FILE. '&- / BY ORDER, '/# & //TRUE COPY// ./ / ( DY./ASSTT.REGISTRAR) , / ITAT, AHMEDABAD 1. DATE OF DIRECT DICTATION ON COMPUTER DATED 16.3.13 2. DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER 20.3.13 OTHER MEMBER 3. DATE ON WHICH THE APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.P. S./P.S.. 4. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER IS PLACED BEFORE THE D ICTATING MEMBER FOR PRONOUNCEMENT 5. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER COMES BACK TO THE SR.P .S./P.S22.3.13 6. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE BENCH CLERK 22.3.13 7. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK . 8. THE DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE ASSISTANT RE GISTRAR FOR SIGNATURE ON THE ORDER.. 9. DATE OF DESPATCH OF THE ORDER