M/s. Aarti Industries Ltd., Vapi V. The Income tax Officer,(TDS), Valsad

ITA 3023/AHD/2010

• Counselvise Citation: 302320514 RSA 2010
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 11 month(s) 22 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 25-10-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 17-10-2012
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 03-11-2010
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RAHUL KUMAR
• Section: 133A; 194C; 201(1); 11

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH AHMEDABAD (BEFORE SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, AM AND SHRI KUL B HARAT, JM) ITA NO.3020, 3021, 3022 AND 3023/AHD/2010 A. Y.: 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10 AND 2010-11 AARTI INDUSTRIES LTD., PLOT NO. 801/23, GIDC ESTATE, PHASE III, VAPI P. A. NO. AAB CA 2787 - L VS THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS), VALSAD (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY SHRI S. N. SOPARKAR, AR RESPONDENT BY SHRI RAHUL KUMAR, SR. DR DATE OF HEARING: 17-10-2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 25-10-2012 O R D E R PER A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY: THESE APPEALS ARE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGGRIEVED BY THE COMMON ORDER OF THE L EARNED CIT(A), VALSAD DATED 29-07-2010 IN APPEAL NO. CIT(A)/VLS/06 ,07,08 &09/10- 11 PASSED U/S 250 READ WITH SECTION 201 AND 201 (1 A) OF THE IT ACT AND FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2007-08 TO 2010-11. TH ESE APPEALS WERE HEARD TOGETHER AND ARE BEING DISPOSED OFF BY T HIS COMMON ORDER FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE. 2. IN ALL THE APPEALS THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THREE ELABORATE COMMON GROUNDS WHEREIN GROUND NO.3 IS GENERAL IN NA TURE AND DOES ITA NO.3020, 3021, 3022 AND 3023/AHD/2010(AY: 2007- 08 TO 2010-11 AARTI INDUSTRIES LTD. VS ITO (TDS), VALSAD 2 NOT SURVIVE FOR ADJUDICATION. THE SURVIVING GROUNDS NO.1 AND 2 ARE REPRODUCED HEREIN BELOW FOR REFERENCE: 1. RE: PAYMENTS TO VAPI WASTE & EFFLUENT MANAGEMENT CO. LTD. (VWEMCL) CONSIDERED AS PROFESSIONAL FEES LIABLE TO TDS U/S 194J: 1.1 ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CA SE AND IN LAW, THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) [HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE LEARNED CIT (A)] HAS ERRED HOLDING THAT TAX WAS DEDUCTIBLE ON THE PAYMENTS MADE TO VWEMCL WITHOUT APPRECIATING THAT NO SERVICES WERE RENDERED BY VWEMCL TO ITS MEMBERS ON THE GROUND OF MUTUALITY. 1.2 ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CA SE AND IN LAW, THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN HOLDING THE APPELLANT AS AN ASSESSEE IN DEFAULT U/S 201 R . W. S. 201(1A) BY CONSIDERING THE PAYMENT TO VWEMCL AS LIABLE TO TAX DEDUCTION U/S. 194J. 1.3 WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO THE ABOVE, THE LEARNED CIT (A) OUGHT TO HAVE CONSIDERED THAT THE APPELLANT HAS CORRECTLY DEDUCTED THE TAX U/S 194C ON PAYMENT MADE TO VWEMCL. 1.4 WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO THE ABOVE, NO RECOVERY OF SHORT TAX DEDUCTED AT SOURCE ON ABOVE ALLEGED GROUND SHOULD BE DONE FROM THE APPELLANT, AS THE PAYEE HAS ALREADY PAID TAXES ON THE SAME. 2. RE: LEVY OF INTEREST U/S. 201(1A): 2.1 ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF T HE C ASE AND N LAW, THE LEARNED CIT(A) GROSSLY ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN LEVYING INTEREST U/S. 201(1A) ON THE ALLEGED TDS DEFAULT OF THE APPELLANT. ITA NO.3020, 3021, 3022 AND 3023/AHD/2010(AY: 2007- 08 TO 2010-11 AARTI INDUSTRIES LTD. VS ITO (TDS), VALSAD 3 3. THE FACTS OF THE CASE IN BRIEF ARE THAT THE ASSE SSEE IS A LIMITED COMPANY ENGAGED IN MANUFACTURING AND TRADING OF DYE S, INTERMEDIATES, ORGANIC & INORGANIC CHEMICALS, AGROC HEMICALS AND PHARMACEUTICALS. THE ASSESSEES ADMINISTRATIVE OFFI CE IS SITUATED AT MUMBAI AND ITS FACTORY IS SITUATED AT VAPI IN VALSA D DISTRICT OF GUJARAT. THE LEARNED AO CONDUCTED SURVEY U/S 133A O F THE IT ACT WITH REFERENCE TO SPECIAL REFERENCE TO TAX DEDUCTIO N AT SOURCES AT THE PREMISES OF THE ASSESSEE ON 05-01-2010. DURING THE COURSE OF SURVEY PROCEEDINGS IT WAS NOTICED THAT VARIOUS PAYM ENTS WERE MADE TO VAPI WASTE & EFFLUENT MANAGEMENT CO. LTD. (VWEMC L, VAPI) FOR TREATMENT OF WASTE GENERATED AT THE TIME OF MANUFAC TURING CHEMICALS BY THE ASSESSEE. THE LEARNED AO OPINED THAT THE PA YMENTS MADE BY THE ASSESSEE WERE FOR TECHNICAL SERVICES RENDERED W HEREBY TDS WAS DEDUCTIBLE U/S 194J OF THE ACT AND NOT U/S 194C OF THE ACT AS CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE. THEREFORE, THE LEARNED AO CONSIDER ED THE ASSESSEE AS AN ASSESSEE IN DEFAULT U/S. 201(1) AND 201 (1A ) OF THE ACT IN RESPECT OF THE PAYMENTS MADE TO VWEMCL AND RAISED D EMANDS AGAINST THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATT ER BEFORE THE LEARNED CIT(A) AND SUBMITTED THAT VWEMCL WAS INCORP ORATED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956 ON 17-01-1997 COLLECTIVELY BY THE INDUSTRIAL UNITS LOCATED AT GIDCS VAPI INDUSTRIAL ESTATE AS PER DIRECTIONS OF THE HONBLE GUJARAT HIGH COURT FOR TREATING WASTE WATER DISCHARGED BY THEM, WITH NO SHARE CAPITAL. THUS, ALL THE INDUSTRI AL UNITS LOCATED AT GIDCS VAPI INDUSTRIAL ESTATE WERE AUTOMATICALLY MA DE MEMBERS OF VWEMCL. SINCE, VWEMCL RENDERED SERVICES TO THE ASSE SSEE AS WELL AS TO THE OTHER MEMBERS OF VWEMCL THE CONCEPT OF MUTUALITY SHALL APPLY. IT WAS, THEREFORE, SUBMITTED THAT THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION ITA NO.3020, 3021, 3022 AND 3023/AHD/2010(AY: 2007- 08 TO 2010-11 AARTI INDUSTRIES LTD. VS ITO (TDS), VALSAD 4 194C OF THE IT ACT WOULD APPLY IN THE CASE OF THE A SSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE ALSO RELIED ON THE DECISION OF ITAT MUMBAI BENCHES IN THE CASE OF M/S. RUBY MACONS LTD. IN ITA NO.4506/MUM/20 08. THE LEARNED CIT(A) HOWEVER, AFTER CONSIDERING THE SUBM ISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE AND THE MATERIALS ON RECORD, EXAMINED THE ISSUE AND HELD THAT THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 194J OF THE IT ACT W OULD APPLY INSTEAD OF SECTION 194C OF THE IT ACT AS CLAIMED BY THE ASS ESSEE. THE RELEVANT PORTION OF THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT(A) IS REPRODUCED HEREIN BELOW:- 10.5 DECISIO N: IN THE FOREGOING PARAGRAPHS, I HAVE ANALYZED WHAT CONSTITUTE TECHNICAL SERVICE WITH THE HELP OF INTERPRETATIONS GIVEN BY THE VARIOUS JUDICI AL AUTHORITIES. WHAT CAN BE CLEARLY DISTINGUISHABLE IS THAT VWEMCL IS RENDERING SERVICE FOR WHICH IT WAS INCORPORATED. THAT VWEMCL IS NOT A MUTUAL CONCERN. THE SERVICE PROVIDED WAS TECHNICAL SERVICE INVOLVING HUMAN ELEMENTS. THE SERVICE OF THIS NATURE INVOLVES HUMAN SKILLS AS WELL AS PLANT. IT IS NOT AUTOMATIC. THEREFORE, IT FALLS WITHIN THE PURVIEW OF THE TECHNICAL SERVICES AS PROVIDED IN SECTION 194 J R. W. S. 9 (1) (VII). THE APPELLANT P AID FEES/CHARGES FOR THE TECHNICAL SERVICE RECEIVED FRO M VWEMCL. IN VIEW OF THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES ENUMERATED IN THE FOREGOING PARAS, I AM OF THE FIRM VIEW THAT THE ACTION OF THE AO DOES NOT CALL FOR INTERFERENCE. THUS THIS GROUND OF APPEAL IS DISMISSED. 11 GROUND NO.2 RELATES TO LEVY OF INTEREST U/S. 201(1A ). THE CONTENTION IN THIS GROUND IS CONSEQUENTIAL TO T HE GROUND NO.1. SINCE, I HAVE CONFIRMED THE ACTION OF THE AO, THIS GROUND OF APPEAL ALSO MEETS THE SAME FATE. HENCE DISMISSED AS CONSEQUENTIAL TO THE GROUND NO.1. ITA NO.3020, 3021, 3022 AND 3023/AHD/2010(AY: 2007- 08 TO 2010-11 AARTI INDUSTRIES LTD. VS ITO (TDS), VALSAD 5 12. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL IS DISMISSED. 4. BEFORE US, THE LEARNED AR REITERATED THE SUBMISS IONS MADE BEFORE THE AUTHORITIES BELOW AND ALSO RELIED UPON T HE DECISION OF ITAT MUMBAI D BENCH IN THE CASE OF M/S. RUBY MACONS LT D. VS DCIT IN ITA NO.4056/MUM/2008 DATED 11-06-2010 WHEREIN IT W AS HELD IN PARA 11 TO 16 AS UNDER: 11. WE HAVE CAREFULLY CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE RECORD. WE HAVE ALSO CAREFULLY PERUSED THE CASE LAW RELIED UPON BY THE LEARNED COUNSEL, APPEARING ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. IN THE CASE OF CIT VS BHARTI CELLULAR LTD . (2009) 319 ITR 139 (DEL) THE HONBLE DELHI HIGH COU RT OBSERVED THAT THE EXPRESSION TECHNICAL SERVICES H AS TO BE UNDERSTOOD IN THE SENSE IN WHICH IT WAS USED IN EXPLANATION 2 TO SECTION 9 (1) (VII) OF THE ACT AND , BY APPLYING THE RULE OF NOSCITUR A SOCIIS, THE WORD TECHNICAL WOULD TAKE COLOUR FROM THE ADJUNCT WORD S I.E., MANAGERIAL AND CONSULTANCY, BETWEEN WHICH IT IS SANDWICHED. SINCE THE WORDS MANAGERIAL AND CONSULTANCY INVOLVE A HUMAN ELEMENT, EVEN THE EXPRESSION TECHNICAL SERVICE HAS TO BE UNDERSTOOD AS A SERVICE WHICH PREDOMINANTLY INVOLVES HUMAN ELEMENT. IN THE SAID CASE BHARATI CELLULAR LTD. PROVIDES INTERCONNECTION BETWEEN ONE NET WORK TO TH E OTHER, WHICH ARE KNOWN AS PORTS AND PAYMENTS MADE BY THE ASSESSEE FOR SUCH INTERCONNECTIONS WERE HELD TO BE NOT INVOLVING ANY SERVICES RENDERED BY A HUMA N AND THUS IT CANNOT BE CONSIDERED AS A TECHNICAL SERVICES AS CONTEMPLATED UNDER SECTION 194J OF THE ACT. 12. IN THE CASE OF SKYCELL COMMUNICATIONS LTD. VS. DCIT (SUPRA) THE HONBLE MADRAS HIGH COURT ANALYSED ITA NO.3020, 3021, 3022 AND 3023/AHD/2010(AY: 2007- 08 TO 2010-11 AARTI INDUSTRIES LTD. VS ITO (TDS), VALSAD 6 THE PROVISIONS OF THE ACT TO HOLD THAT MERE COLLECT ION OF A FEE FOR USE OF A STANDARD FACILITY PROVIDED TO ALL THOSE WILLING TO PAY FOR IT DOES NOT AMOUNT TO FEE FOR TECHNICAL SERVICES. VSAT CHARGES, LEASED LINE CHARGES, BOLT CHARGES, DEMAT CHARGES ETC., PAID TO STOCK EXCHANGE WERE ALSO HELD TO BE NOT PREDOMINANTLY REQUIRING HUMAN SERVICES BUT ONLY FEES COLLECTED FOR USE OF A STANDARD FACILITY. 13. IN THE CASE OF JAIPUR VIDYUT VITRAN NIGAM LTD. VS. DCIT (SUPRA) THE QUESTION FOR CONSIDERATION WAS AS TO WHETHER PAYMENTS FOR TRANSMISSION, WHEELING AND SLDC CHARGES TO ELECTRICITY TRANSMISSION COMPANY WOULD FALL WITHIN THE MEANING OF THE EXPRESSION TECHNICAL SERVICES. THE BENCH OBSERVED THAT AS PE R THE AGREEMENT THERE WAS OPEN ACCESS TO ALL USERS WITH REGARD TO TRANSMISSION LINES. MERELY BECAUSE OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE OF TRANSMISSION LINES AND MAINTAINING ITS GRID STATION WAS WITH THE HELP OF CERTAIN WORK FORCE, IT CANNOT BE CONSIDERED THAT TH EY WERE RENDERING ANY TECHNICAL SERVICES TO THE ASSESSEE SINCE THEY CAN BE SAID TO BE SIMPLY DISCHARGING THEIR FUNCTION OF OPERATING AND MAINTAINING ITS GRID STATION AND TRANSMISSION LINES . ANALYSING SECTION 194J OF THE ACT, THE BENCH FURTHE R NOTICED THAT ONLY WHEN THE TECHNOLOGY OR TECHNICAL KNOWLEDGE OF A PERSON IS MADE AVAILABLE TO OTHERS I T CAN FALL WITHIN THE EXPRESSION TECHNICAL SERVICE AND MERE PERMISSION TO USE TECHNOLOGY WOULD NOT ATTRAC T PROVISIONS OF SECTION 194J OF THE ACT. 14. WE MAY TURN TO THE FACTS OF THE CASE ON HAND S O AS TO APPRECIATE AS TO WHETHER THE SERVICES RENDERE D BY VWEMCL INVOLVES HUMAN INTERFACE OR WAS IT MERELY A STANDARD FACILITY PROVIDED TO ALL THE MEMB ERS WHO WERE JOINTLY INVOLVED IN SETTING UP AFFLUENT TREATMENT PLANT. IT IS NOT IN DISPUTE THAT THE RATE IS FIXED DEPENDING ON THE ACTUAL WATER CONSUMED BY MEMBER UNIT AND ALSO BASED ON DISCHARGE QUALITY NORMS. IT IS ALSO NOT IN DISPUTE THAT AMOUNT COLLEC TED ITA NO.3020, 3021, 3022 AND 3023/AHD/2010(AY: 2007- 08 TO 2010-11 AARTI INDUSTRIES LTD. VS ITO (TDS), VALSAD 7 IS ON NO PROFIT NO LOSS BASIS AND IF ANY EXCESS AMOUNT IS COLLECTED IT IS PASSED ON TO MEMBERS BY WAY OF DISCOUNT. THIS WAS ACCEPTED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER WHILE MAKING AN ASSESSMENT UNDER SECTION 143 (3) OF THE ACT IN THE CASE OF VWEMCL. SUCH BEIN G THE CASE IT HAS TO BE CONSIDERED AS A STANDARD FACI LITY AVAILABLE TO EACH MEMBER/INDUSTRIAL UNDERTAKING; VWEMCL IS RUNNING A TREATMENT PLANT PROVIDING A STANDARD FACILITY AND IF ANY WORK FORCE IS INVOLVED IN MAINTAINING THE STANDARD FACILITY IT CANNOT BE SAID THAT A SPECIAL SKILL/ KNOWLEDGE WAS PASSED ON BY INDIVIDUALS TO THE ASSESSEE IN LIEU OF A SPECIFIC F EE COLLECTED. SUCH BEING THE CASE, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT IT CANNOT BE CONSIDERED AS A PAYMENT IN THE FORM OF FEE FOR TECHNICAL SERVICES . IN THE CASE OF RECIPIENT COMPANY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ACCEPTED THAT CHARGES WERE RECOVERED FROM THE MEMBER UNITS BY ADOPTING MUTUALITY CONCEPT. 15. IN FACT, IN THE SUBSEQUENT YEARS, ASSESSING OFFICER HAS NOT INVOKED THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 194J OF THE ACT IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE. IT APPEARS THAT THE ASSESSEE AGREED TO DEDUCT 2% TAX UNDER SECTION 194C OF THE ACT BASED UPON AN UNDERSTANDING REACHED BY ALL THE INDUSTRIAL UNDERTAKINGS IN THAT LOCALITY AND SUCH UNDERSTANDING WAS ACCEPTED BY THE REVENUE. IT MAY BE POINTED OUT THAT IN THE SUBSEQUENT YEARS THE ASSESSING OFFICER ADMITTED THA T PROVISIONS OF SECTION 194J OF THE ACT ARE NOT APPLICABLE IN RESPECT OF PAYMENTS, MADE BY MEMBER INDUSTRIAL UNDERTAKINGS TO VWEMCL, IN THE FORM OF AFFLUENT TREATMENT CHARGES. ON A CONSPECTUS OF THE MATTER, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE IMPUGNED PAYMENTS ARE NOT HIT BY THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 194J OF THE ACT AND CONSEQUENTLY DISALLOWANCE MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER UNDER SECTION 40(A)(I) OF THE ACT IS NOT IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. 16. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED . ITA NO.3020, 3021, 3022 AND 3023/AHD/2010(AY: 2007- 08 TO 2010-11 AARTI INDUSTRIES LTD. VS ITO (TDS), VALSAD 8 4.1 THE LEARNED AR BY REFERRING TO THE ABOVE DECISI ON SUBMITTED THAT FROM THE SUBSEQUENT YEAR ALL THE MEMBERS OF TH E ASSOCIATION AGREED TO DEDUCT TAX U/S 194C OF THE IT ACT ON THE UNDERSTANDING REACHED BETWEEN THE MEMBERS OF VWEMCL AND THE REVEN UE. THE LEARNED AR FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE ISSUE IS NOW ALSO COVERED BY THE DECISION ITAT AHMEDABAD A BENCH DATED 08-04-2 011 IN THE CASE OF M/S. N. R. AGARWAL INDUSTRIES VS ITO (TDS), VALSAD IN ITA NOS. 3082, 3082, 3084 AND 3085/AHD/2010 AND THE DEC ISION OF ITAT AHMEDABAD D BENCH DATED 13-07-2012 IN THE CASE OF ITO (TDS) VS M/S. MIRCOR INKS LTD. IN ITA NO.94/AHD/2012 WHE REIN THE DECISION OF THE MUMBAY BENCHES OF THE TRIBUNAL CITED SUPRA A RE FOLLOWED AND THEREFORE, THE AO MAY BE DIRECTED TO AMEND HIS ORDE R AS PER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 194C OF THE IT ACT FOR THE AS SESSMENT YEARS UNDER APPEAL. 5. THE LEARNED DR COULD NOT CONTROVERT THE ARGUMENT PLACED BY THE LEARNED AR. 6. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSION AND CAREFULLY PERUSED THE MATERIALS ON RECORD. ON CONSIDERATION OF THE FACTS OF THE CASE BEFORE US WHICH ARE IDENTICAL TO THE FACTS OF THE CASE AL READY DECIDED BY ITAT MUMBAI BENCH IN THE CASE OF M/S. RUBY MACONS L TD., CITED SUPRA, ITAT AHMEDABAD, IN THE CASE OF M/S. N. R. AG ARWAL INDUSTRIES LTD. AND M/S. MIRCOR INKS LTD. , CITED SUPRA (COPY PLACED ON RECORD) WE HEREBY SET ASIDE THE ORDERS OF THE REVENUE AND D IRECT THE LEARNED AO TO PASS APPROPRIATE ORDER BY HOLDING THAT THE PA YMENTS MADE BY THE ASSESSEE TO VWEMCL FALLS U/S 194C OF THE ACT. ITA NO.3020, 3021, 3022 AND 3023/AHD/2010(AY: 2007- 08 TO 2010-11 AARTI INDUSTRIES LTD. VS ITO (TDS), VALSAD 9 7. SINCE, WE HAVE DECIDED THE ISSUE OF TAXABILITY O F INCOME INVOLVED IN GROUND NO.1 OF THE APPEAL IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE, GROUND NO.2 I.E. LEVY OF INTEREST U/S 201(1A) HAS B ECOME INFRUCTUOUS AND NEED NO FURTHER SEPARATE ADJUDICATION. 8. IN THE RESULT, ALL THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE A RE ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 25-10-2012 SD/- SD/- (KUL BHARAT) JUDICIAL MEMBER (A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER LAKSHMIKANTA DEKA/- COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT CONCERNED 4. THE CIT(A) CONCERNED 5. THE DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER ASSTT. REGISTRAR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 1. DATE OF DICTATION: 17-10-12 COVERED MATTER NO DICTATION. 2. DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE T HE DICTATING MEMBER:18 -10-12/19-10-12 OTHER MEMBER: 3. DATE ON WHICH APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR. P. S./P.S.: 4. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER IS PLACED BEFORE TH E DICTATING MEMBER FOR PRONOUNCEMENT: 5. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER COMES BACK TO THE S R. P.S./P.S.: 6. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE BENCH CLERK: 7. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK: 8. THE DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR FOR SIGNATURE ON THE ORDER: 9. DATE OF DESPATCH OF THE ORDER: