The Orissa State Police Housing & Welfare Corporation, Bhubaneswar V. ACIT, Bhubaneswar

ITA 455/CTK/2012

• Counselvise Citation: 45522114 RSA 2012
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 22 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 09-11-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2004-2005
• Appeal Filed On: 17-09-2012
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: PARAMITA TRIPATHYCIT
• Assessee Lawyers: D K MOHANTY; C R JENA ARS
• Keywords: Depreciation; Opportunity of being heard; Condonation of delay; Reason to believe; Reassessment proceedings
• Section: 32; 148; 144; 142(1); 234B

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK ( ) BEFORE . . , , HONBLE SHRI K.K.GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER. /AND . . . , H ONBLE SHRI K.S.S.PRASAD RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER / I.T.A.NO. 455/CTK/2012 / ASSESSMENT YEAR 2004 - 05 M/S.THE ORISSA STATE POLICE HOUSING & WELFARE CORPORATION,BHOI NAGAR, BHUBANESWAR 751022, ODISHA PAN: AABCT 7853 N. - - - VE RSUS - ASST.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX, CIRCLE 2(2), AAYAKAR BHAWAN, BHUBANESWAR. ( /APPELLANT ) ( / RESPONDENT ) / FOR THE APPELLANT : / SHRI D.K.MOHANTY & C.R.JENA, ARS / FOR THE RESPONDENT: / S M T. PARAMITA TRIPATHY,CIT - DR / DATE OF HEARING: 05.11.2012 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 09.11.2012 / ORDER . . , , SHRI K.K.GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER. THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE RAISES THE FOLLOWI NG GROUNDS. 1. FOR THAT THE ORDER OF ASSESSMENT AS WELL AS THAT OF THE LD. CIT(A) II HAS NEITHER BEEN BASED ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE NOR ON POINTS OF LAW. 2. THAT THE LD. CIT APPEALS II, BHUBANESWAR HAS ERRED ON FAT AS WELL AS ON LAW IN DISMISSING THE APPEAL IN TIME LINE, EVEN WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE MERITS OF THE CASE OTHERWISE. 3. THAT THE DELAY IN FILING THE APPEAL BEING BEYOND THE REASONABLE CONTROL OF THE APPELLANT AND WAS NEITHER DELIBERATE NOR INTENTIONAL, THE CIT APPEAL OUGHT TO HAVE CONDONE THE DELAY. THEREFORE, THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT APPEAL ARE TO BE SET ASIDE. 4. FOR TH AT THE ADDITION OF A SUM OF 55,38,003 AS PER ORDER U/S. 143(3)/144 DATED 22.12.2006 INCLUDED IN THE ORDER OF REASSESSMENT WHICH IN THE MEANTIME HAS BEEN SET ASIDE BY THE I.T.A.T VIDE THEIR ORDER IN L.T. APPEAL NO. 119/CTK/2008 DATED 04.05.2009 BEING NON - EXISTENT AT THE TIME OR PASSING OF THE REASSESSMENT ORDER, ARE REQUIRED TO BE OTHERWISE DELETED ON MERIT . I.T.A.NO. 455/CTK/2012 2 2. THE BRIEF FACTS AS HAVE BEEN BROUGHT ON RECORD ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE M/S. ORISSA STATE HOUSING AND WELFARE CORPORATION LTD, IS A WHOLLY STATE OWNED CORPORATION ESTABLISHED WITH THE MAIN OBJECT TO UNDERTAKE CONSTRUCTION OF BUILDINGS FOR THE HOUSING OF POLICE PERSONNEL OF GOVERNMENT OF ORISSA, EXECUTE HO USING SCHEME FOR THE BENEFIT OF SERVING POLICE PERSONNEL OF GOVERNMENT OF ORISSA, ON DEPOSIT OF COST & OR FUNDS PLACED BY THE VARIOUS AGENCIES. B EING A STATE OWNED GOVERNMENT UNDERTAKING, IT IS FULLY CONTROLLED AND REGULATED BY THE GOVERNMENT OF ORISSA. TH E DIRECTORS ARE ALSO APPOINTED BY THE GOVERNMENT OF ORISSA. THE ASSESSEE BEING A COMPANY MAINTAINS ITS BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS AS REQUIRED IN THE REGULAR COURSE OF BUSINESS ACTIVITIES AND CONFIRMING TO THE PROVISIONS OF THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956, SUCH AS CASH BOOK , LEDGER, JOURNAL REGISTER, SUPPORTING BILLS AND VOUCHER FOR EXPENSES ETC. THE GROSS RECEIPT OF THE COMPANY EXCEEDING RS. 40.00 LAKHS ARE ALSO FURTHER AUDITED BY THE TAX AUDITORS U/S. 44AB OF THE L.T. ACT, 1961. ALMOST ALL THE TRANSACTIONS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE ROUTED THROUGH ITS BANK ACCOUNTS. THUS, THE ACCOUNTS OF THE ASSESSEE COMPANY ARE TRANSPARENT AND VERIFIABLE. AS A LAW ABIDING GOVERNMENT UNDERTAKING, RESPECTING THE INDIAN INCOME TAX ACT, 1961, FOR THE FINANCIAL YEAR ENDING 31 MARCH, 2004, THE DUE DATE OF FILING OF RETURN IN RESPECT OF THE COMPANY BEING 1 ST NOVEMBER 2004, THE ASSESSEE COMPANY FILED ITS RETURN OF INCOME ON DATED 01 .11.2004, BASING ON THE PROVISIONAL ACCOUNT. THE RETURN WAS SELECTED FOR SCRUTINY .THE SCRUTINY ASSESSMENT OF THE AFORESAID RETURN WAS COMPLETED U/S.143(3)/144 OF THE I .T. ACT, ON 22.12.2006. AGGRIEVED WITH THE AFORESAID ORDER APPROACHING THE APPROPRIATE FORUM ULTIMATELY ,THE ITAT ,CUTTACK BENCH ,CUTTACK VIDE ITS ORDER DATED 04.05.2009 SET SIDE THE ASSESSMENT TO DO THE ASSESSME NT DE N O VO AS PER LAW, GIVING REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. I.T.A.NO. 455/CTK/2012 3 2.1. BASING ON THE PROVISIONAL ACCOUNT ACCOMPANIED WITH THE RETURN OF INCOME FILED ON DATED 01.11.2004 WITH THE REASON TO BELIEVE THAT: ON VERIFICATION OF THE RECORD IT I S SEEN THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS CLAIMED DEPRECIATION OF RS. 14,25,185/ - AS PER INCOME TAX ACT, IN CLAUSE ILL OF FORM 3CD, THE ACCOUNTANT HAS CLARIFIED THAT DEPRECIATION HAS BEEN CALCULATED UNDER INCOME TAX ACT CONSIDERING THE OPENING WDV AS PER COMPANIES ACT. HOWEVER AS PER SECTION 32 OF THE ACT WDV AS THE 1ST DAY OF PREVIOUS YEAR AS PER INCOME TAX ACT IS TO BE DETERMINED ON WHICH RATE OF DEPRECIATION AS APPLICABLE CAN BE CLAIMED. HENCE, ADOPTING WDV AS PER COMPANIES ACT IS NOT PERMISSIBLE U/S. 32, THEREFORE, THERE HAS BEEN EXCESS CLAIM OF DEPRECIATION OF RS. 8,06,007/ - , THE COMPLETED ASSESSMENT U/S 144 WAS REOPENED AND NOTICE U/S 148 WAS ISSUED ON DATED 17.03.2009. 2.2. THE ASSESSEE, BEING A STATE OWNED UNDERTAKING, THE AUDITORS ARE APPOINTED BY THE COMPTROLL ER AND AUDITOR GENERAL OF INDIA . .THOUGH THE ACCOUNTS ARE COMPLIED BY THE ASSESSEE COMPANY, ON 30.10.2004 BUT HOWEVER, THE AUDITS WERE ONLY TAKEN UP AFTER THE APPOINTMENT OF THE STATUTORY AUDITORS ON 21.07.2006. FOR THE IMPUGNED YEAR, THE FOLLOWING EVENTS/ FACTS ARE PLACED HEREWITH FOR PROPER APPRECIATION. 30.10.04: THE ACCOUNTS WERE COMPILED BY THE ASSESSEE COMPANY. 21.07.06 : STATUTORY AUDITORS WERE APPOINTED. 11.05307 THE ACCOUNTS WERE AUTHENTICATED. 15.05.07 AUTHENTICATED ACCOUNTS WERE HANDED OVER TO THE STATUTORY AUDITORS FOR AUDIT. 26.07.07 ACCOUNTS WERE REFERRED TO C & AG OF INDIA. 22.10.07 THE AUDIT CERTIFICATES WERE RECEIVED FROM C & AG OF INDIA. 24.03.08: A.G.M. OF THE ASSESSEE COMPANY APPROVED THE ACCOUNTS. 06.06.08: TAX AUDIT REP ORT WAS OBTAINED FROM THE TAX AUDITORS. I.T.A.NO. 455/CTK/2012 4 2.3. FINDING THE APPROPRIATE OPPORTUNITY, SINCE IN THE MEANTIME, THE A.G.M. OF THE ASSESSEE COMPANY HAS APPROVED THE FINAL ACCOUNT FOR THE YEAR ENDING 31ST MARCH 2004, THE ASSESSEE COMPANY FILED ITS RETURN OF INCOME IN PURSUANCE TO NOTICE U/S. 148 DISCLOSING THE INCOME BASING ON THE AUTHENTICATED ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE COMPANY. THE TAX DUE ON THE DECLARED INCOME ALONG WITH INTEREST U/S. 234B & 234C OF THE L.T. ACT, 1961 WERE DISCHARGED FULLY VOLUNTARILY WHILE FILING THE RETURN IN COMPLIANCE TO NOTICE U/S. 148. 2.4. O N PROPER COMPLIANCE TO THE NOTICE U/S. 142(1) VIS - - VIS THE PRODUCTION OF BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS AND THE DETAILS AS CALLED FOR FROM TIME TO TIME, THE ASSESSMENT U/S. 147/143 OF THE L.T. ACT, WAS COMPLETED ACCEP TING THE TOTAL INCOME AS PER RETURN FILED AT RS. 3,47,21,855/ - . HOWEVER ,FURTHER THE ASSESSING OFFICER WITHOUT A SPEAKING ORDER AND ON CERTAIN CONJECTURE AND SURMISES ADDED A SUM OF RS.55,38,003/ - WITH THE OBSERVATION THAT ADD: AS PER ORDER U/S 143(3)/144 DATED 22.12.2006.( THOUGH IN THE MEANWHILE THE LT.A.T VIDE HIS ORDER DATED 04.05.2009 IN THE LT. APPEAL NO. 119/CTK/2008 HAS SET ASIDE THE ORDER U/S. 143(3)1144 DTD. 22.12.2006). 2.5. THE ORDER IN ORIGINAL WAS COMMUNICATED TO THE RETAINER OF THE ASSESSEE F OR FURTHER COURSE OF ACTION ON DATED 11.02.2010, BUT HOWEVER, THE APPEAL WAS FILED ONLY ON DATED 07.09.2010. HENCE, THERE WAS A DELAY IN FILING OF APPEAL BY 181 DAYS. THE REASON FOR DELAY WAS THAT THOUGH THE ORIGINAL ORDER ALONG WITH THE CONNECTING DEMAND NOTICE WAS HANDED OVER TO ONE OF THE JUNIOR FOR PREPARING APPEAL MEMO, STATEMENT OF FACTS AND GROUNDS OF APPEAL ETC, FOR FILING THE APPEAL, BUT DUE TO SUDDEN ILLNESS OF THE JUNIOR, THE SAME COULD NOT BE FILED IN TIME AND ON HIS RECOVERY THE APPEAL WAS FILE D BEFORE THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, APPEAL II, BHUBANESWAR ACCOMPANIED WITH CONDONATION OF DELAY STATING THE REASONS THEREOF. I.T.A.NO. 455/CTK/2012 5 2.6. IN COURSE OF APPEARANCE BEFORE THE CIT APPEAL II, BHUBANESWAR, FOR APPEAL HEARING, IT WAS RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED THAT T HERE BEING A MERITORIOUS MATTER AND NEEDS TO BE DECIDED ON MERIT, IT WAS RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED THAT SUCH MERIT NEEDS THE LIBERAL CONSIDERATION OF THE PROCEDURAL DELAY. IT WAS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT IT IS THE SETTLED POSITION OF LAW THAT WHERE SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE AND TECHNICAL CONSIDERATIONS ARE PITTED AGAINST EACH OTHER, THE CAUSE OF SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE TO PREFER, FOR THE OTHER SIDE CANNOT CLAIM TO HAVE A VESTED RIGHT IN INJUSTICE BEING DONE BECAUSE IN FILING A DELAYED APPEAL. THE MERIT OF THE CASE IS THAT THE ADDITION OF A SUM OF RS. 55,38,003/ - AS PER ORDER U/S. 143(3)/144 DATED 22.12.2006 AS INCLUDED IN THE ORDER OF REASSESSMENT (WHICH IN THE MEANTIME HAS BEEN SET ASIDE BY THE L.T.A.T VIDE THEIR ORDER IN L.T. APPEAL NO. 1 19/CTK/2008 DATED 04.05.2009) RE QUIRED TO BE CONSIDERED FOR DELETION. THEREFORE, THIS WAS A DESERVING CASE FOR A LIBERAL APPROACH FOR CONDONING THE DELAY. THOUGH THE LD. C .I .T, APPEAL IL, BHUBANESWAR APPRECIATED THE SUBMISSION, BUT WITHOUT EXTENDING A LIBERAL APPROACH HAS DISMISSED THE A PPEAL IN LIME LINE OBSERVING THAT THE DELAY AS EXPLAINED BY THE APPELLANT IS FAR FROM BONAFIDE. THE APPEAL WAS REJECTED EVEN WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE MERITS OF THE CASE OTHERWISE. 3. THE LEARNED COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEE FOR THE PURPOSE OF CONDONATION OF DELA Y IN FILING THE APPEAL HAS BEEN CONSIDERED BY THE TRIBUNAL IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR THE AYS 2004 - 05 AND 2005 - 06 WHEN THE SUBJECT MATTER WAS RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE CIT(A) TO DISPOSE OF THE ISSUES ON MERITS AS WERE ON FACTS HAVE CONSIDERED FOR QUANTUM WHICH QUANTUM IS NOW BEING ARGUED BEFORE US. THE LEARNED COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE TRIBUNAL IN THEIR ORDER DT.4.5.2009 FOR THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT YEAR HAD CONSIDERED THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE THAT THE ASSESSMENT COULD NOT BE MADE ON PROVI SIONAL FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FILED ALONG WITH THE RETURN OF INCOME INSOFAR I.T.A.NO. 455/CTK/2012 6 AS ON HAVING RECEIVED THE AUDITED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS, THE ASSESSING OFFICER WAS TO RECOMPUTE THE INCOME AFRESH DE NOVO WHICH COPY OF THE ORDER IS PLACED ON RECORD. A PERUSAL OF TH E ASSESSMENT ORDER, THE LEARNED COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEE POINTED OUT THAT IN ORDER TO REGULARIZE THE INCOME RETURNED BY THE ASSESSEE, THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS MERELY ACCEPTED THE RETURNED INCOME IN PURSUANCE TO NOTICE U/S.148 FILED BY THE ASSESSEE OUGHT NO T TO HAVE OVERLOOKED THE DIRECTION OF THE TRIBUNAL INSOFAR AS THE ASSESSMENT ORDER IS DT.31.12.20 - 09 AND THE TRIBUNAL HAD PRONOUNCED THE ORDER ON 4.5.2009. THEREFORE HAVING ISSUED NOTICE U/S.14 7 /148, THE ASSESSING OFFICER MERELY ADDED THE A MOUNT AS PER ORD ER U/S.143(3)/1 44 DT.22.12.2006 WHICH ORDER HAD BEEN SET ASIDE BY THE TRIBUNAL OUGHT TO HAVE CLARIFIED WHETHER THE DIRECTION OF THE TRIBUNAL WAS TO INCLUDE THE SUM OF 55,38,003 WHICH ALREADY WAS RENDERED TO TAX BY THE ASSESSEE IN THE RETURNED INCOME BY THE ASSESSEE ON NOTICE U/S.147 WAS GLADLY ACCEPTED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THE LEARNED CIT(A) ON THE ASSESSEES APPEAL RATHER CONFINED HIMSELF TO THE DELAY IN FILING O F THE APPEAL WHICH ISSUE HAS BEEN RENDERED BY THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE ITSELF ON THE APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION271(1)(C) AND SECTION 271(1)(B) WHEN THE TRIBUNAL WAS PLEASED TO RESTORE THE ISSUE OF QUANTUM ADDITION TO WHICH CONSEQUEN CE THE PENALTY APPEALS WOULD LIE. HE POINTED OUT THAT THE DATE OF ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL IS DT.28.9.2012 AND THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT(A) IS DT.29.8.2012 THEREFORE CONCLUDING HIS ARGUMENT SUBMITTED ON BOTH COUNTS THE AUTHORITIE S BELOW HAVE NOT ACTED ON THE DIRECTION OF THE TRIBUNAL INSPITE OF FACTUAL MATRIX HAVE BEEN COMMITTED BY THEM HAS BEEN HIGHLIGHTED BY THEMSELVES. HE PRAYED THAT THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER BE DIRECTED TO BE MODIFIED TO THE EXTENT THAT THE INCOME ASS ESSED BY ORDER DT.22.12.2006 COULD NOT BE FURTHER ADDED BY HIM WITHOUT BRINGING ON RECORD AS TO HOW THE SAME OTHERWISE WAS I.T.A.NO. 455/CTK/2012 7 ACCEPTED TO HIM ON ISSUE OF NOTICE U/S.147/148 WHEN THE RETURNED INCOME W AS INCLUSIVE OF SUCH INCOME BASED ON PROVISIONAL FINANCIAL S TATEMENTS SUBMITTED AT THE TIME OF ORIGINAL RETURN. 4. THE LEARNED DR SUPPORTED THE CONTENTION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER INSOFAR AS THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS NOT ADJUDICATED THIS ISSUE WITH RESPECT TO THE MERIT ADDITION. SHE SUBMITTED THE DISALLOWANCE OF DEPRE CIATION NOT CLAIMED AS PER THE PROVISIONAL FINANCIAL STATEMENT WAS RIGHTLY BROUGHT TO TAX BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN VIEW OF THE ASSESSMENT HAVING BEEN COMPLETED U/SS.143 (3) /144 WAS AT 76,42,820. THEREFORE, 55,38,003 BEING PART OF INCOME WHICH HAD NOT BEEN CLAIMED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF THE I.T.ACT WAS RIGHTLY BROUGHT TO TAX WHICH WAS THE FACTUAL ASPECT FOR ISSUING NOTICE U/SS.147/148. SHE PRAYED THAT THE ORDER OF THE ASS ESSING OFFICER BE UPHELD. 5. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. ON CAREFUL CONSIDERATION OF THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, WE ARE INCLINED TO HOLD THAT THE INCOMES PARTICIPATING IN THE PROVISIONAL FINANCIAL STATEMENTS HAVE TO NECESSARILY FIND A PLACE IN THE FINAL FINANCIAL STATEMENTS DULY AUDITED AND SUBMITTED TO THE I.T.DEPARTMENT. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HIMSELF AGREED TO THE PROPOSITION THAT THE INCOME DECLARED IN PURSUANCE TO NOTICE U/SS.147/148 WAS TO REGULARIZE THE RETURN . THE ASSESSING OFFI CER THEREFORE HAD TO SPECIFY AS TO UNDER WHAT HEAD THIS PARTICULAR INCOME COULD BE TAXED AGAIN INSOFAR AS THE NOTICE ISSU ED FOR REASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS WAS ON THE BASIS OF REGULARIZING THE RETURNED INCOME AS PER THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS DULY AUDITED THE A SSESSEE BEING A GOVERNMENT OF ORISSA UNDERTAKING. THE ASSESSING OFFICER WAS NOT TO FIND FAULT WITH THE DELAY IN FILING THE REGULAR RETURN BUT UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 147/148 WHEN THE LEARNED CIT(A) CONFINED HIMSELF TO THE FINDING AS TO WHY THE APPE ALS WERE FILED BEYOND THE DUE DATE WHICH ISSUE WAS I.T.A.NO. 455/CTK/2012 8 DELIBERATED UPON BY THE TRIBUNAL IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT YEAR ON THE LEVY OF PENALTY. THE ISSUE WAS RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR CONSIDERATION AFRESH ON THE ASSESSMENT OF QUANTUM FOR TAXATION WHEN THE ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT STOOD SET ASIDE BY THE TRIBUNAL BY AN ORDER DT.4.52009. IT CANNOT BE SAID THAT THE ASSESSMENT U/S.147/148 WAS IN PURSUANCE TO THE TRIBUNAL DIRECTING THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO MAKE A FRESH ASSE SSMENT THEREFORE JUSTIFIES THE PRAYER OF THE LEARNED COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEE THAT THE ORIGINAL RETURNED INCOME WHICH HAS BEEN BROUGHT T O TAX U/SD.147/148 STANDS NULLIFIED WHICH INCOME WAS TO BE COMPUTED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER DE NOVO ON THE DIRECTION OF THE TRIBUNAL. IN THIS VIEW OF THE MATTER CONFINING OURSELVES TO THE ISSUES RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE, WE DIRECT DELETION OF THE ADDITION OF 55,38,003 IN THE COMPUTATION OF INCOME VIDE ORDER U/S.143(3) R.W.S 147 DT.31.12.2009. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. SD/ - SD/ - ( . . . ) , (K.S.S.PRASAD RAO), JUDICIAL MEMBER ( . . ) , , (K.K.GUPTA), ACCOUNTANT MEMBER. ( ) DATE: - COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1 . / THE APPELL ANT : M/S.THE ORISSA STATE POLICE HOUSING & WELFARE CORPORATION,BHOI NAGAR, BHUBANESWAR 751022, ODISHA. 2 / THE RESPONDENT: ASST.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX, CIRCLE 2(2), AAYAKAR BHAWAN, BHUBANESWAR. 3 . / THE CIT, 4 . ( )/ THE CIT(A), 5 . / DR, CUTTACK BENCH 6 . GUARD FILE . / TRUE COPY, / BY ORDER, ( ), (H.K.PADHEE), SENIOR.PRIVATE SECRETARY. I.T.A.NO. 455/CTK/2012 9 APPENDIX XVII S EAL TO BE AFFIXED ON THE ORDER SHEET BY THE SR. P.S./P.S. AFTER DICTATION IS GIVEN 1. DATE OF DICTATION 05.11.2012 . 2. DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER 06. 11.2012 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 DICTATING MEMBER FOR PRONOUNCEMENT.... 5. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER COMES BACK TO THE SR. P.S./P.S . 6. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE BENCH CLERK 09.11.2012 7. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK .. 8. THE DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR F OR SIGNATURE ON THE ORDER ................ 9. DATE OF DESPATCH OF THE ORDER ..