WALCHAND KAMDHENU COMMERICALS P.LTD, MUMBAI V. ASST CIT RG 5(3), MUMBAI

ITA 4822/MUM/2012

• Counselvise Citation: 482219914 RSA 2012
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 5 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 16-01-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Next Hearing Date: 19-11-2014
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 23-07-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RUDALPH N DSOUZA
• Assessee Lawyers: VASANT I PATEL
• Keywords: Earning of tax free income
• Section: 14A; 115JB

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH G, MUMBAI , BEFORE SHRI R.C. SHARMA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VIVEK VARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. : 4822/MUM/2012 (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2009-10) WALCHAND KAMDHENU COMMERCIALS P LTD, NEELA HOUSE, 2 ND FLOOR, M L DAHANUKAR MARG, NAVI MUMBAI - 400 026 PAN: AAACK 5045 J VS ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX RANGE -5(3), AAYAKAR BHAVAN, MUMBAI -400 020 (ASSESSEE) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : ! ' MS VASANTI PATEL RESPONDENT BY : SHRI RUDALPH N DSOUZA # $ !%& /DATE OF HEARING : 19-11-2014 '() $ !%& / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 16-01-2015 ORDER PER VIVEK VARMA, JM: THE APPEAL IS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF CIT(A) 9, MUMBAI, DATED 11.04.2012, WHEREIN THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS HAVE BEEN TAKEN: 1. THE CIT(A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE DISALLOWANCE OF EXPENDITURE OF RS. 43,42,524/- UNDER SECTION 14A OF THE ACT AND RULE 8D OF THE INCOME-TAX RULES 1962 ON THE GRO UND THAT THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT ESTABLISH THE NEXUS BETWEEN THE ENTIRE CAPITAL BEING INVESTED IN SECURITIES. 2. THE CIT(A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE DISALLOWANCE OF THE SAID EXPENDITURE ON THE ALLEGED GROUND THAT NO EVIDENCE WAS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AND FURTHER BY OBSERVING THAT IT WAS IMPOSSIBLE TO BELIEVE THAT OUT OF THE COMMON HOTCH POTCH OF THE FUNDS, THE ENTIRE CAPITAL WOULD HAVE GONE INTO INVESTMENT IN SHARES WITHOUT A PART OF THE SAME GOI NG TO THE BUSINESS. 3. THE CIT(A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE DISALLOWANCE OF THE SAID EXPENDITURE BY FAILING TO APPRECIATE THAT MOST OF T HE INVESTMENTS ARE OLD INVESTMENTS MADE IN THE EARLIER YEAR. 4. THE CIT(A) FAILED TO APPRECIATE THAT NO EXPENDITURE WAS IN FACT INCURRED BY THE ASSESSEE IN EARNING THE TAX FR EE INCOME. WALCHAND KAMDHENU COMMERCIALS P LTD ITA 4822/M/2012 2 5. THE CIT(A) FAILED TO APPRECIATE THAT SECTION 14A(3) WOULD APPLY ONLY IF THE AO HAVING REGARD TO THE ACCOUNTS OF THE ASSESSEE IS NOT SATISFIED WITH THE CLAIM OF THE ASS ESSEE THAT NO EXPENDITURE HAS BEEN INCURRED TO EARN TAX FREE I NCOME. 6. THE CIT(A) FAILED TO APPRECIATE THAT FOR DISALLOWIN G ANY EXPENDITURE UNDER SECTION 14A A FINDING OF THE SAID EXPENDITURE HAVING BEEN INCURRED IS NECESSARY, AND IN CASE IT IS FOUND THAT FOR EARNING EXEMPTED INCOME NO EXP ENDITURE HAS BEEN INCURRED, DISALLOWANCE UNDER SECTION 14A C ANNOT BE MADE. THE AFORESAID GROUND OF APPEAL ARE WITHOUT PREJUDIC E TO ONE ANOTHER. THE ASSESSEE CRAVES LEAVE TO AMEND, TO MOD IFY, TO ALTER, TO SUBSTITUTE AND / OR TO DELETE ALL OR ANY OF THE AFORESAID GROUNDS OF APPEAL AT OR BEFORE THE HEARING. 2. THE SOLITARY ISSUE EMERGING IN THE APPEAL PERTAINS TO COMPUTATION OF DISALLOWANCE U/S 14A. 3. THE FACTS ARE, THE ASSESSEE COMPANY IS ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF DEALING IN SHARES, SECURITIES AND HOSPI TALITY BUSINESS. IN THE RELEVANT ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS TH E AO NOTICED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS EARNED DIVIDEND INCOM E OF RS. 99,45,593/- ON SHARES AND RS.90,407/- ON UNITS OF MUTUAL FUNDS. IN ITS REPLY, THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED, NO DISALLOWANCE IS CALLED FOR, AS THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT INCURRED ANY EXPENDITURE, FOR THE PURPOSES OF EARNING EXEMPT INCOME. 4. THE AO CONSIDERED THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE AND APPLYING RULE 8D READ WITH SECTION 14A OF THE ACT, COMPUTED THE DISALLOWANCE OF RS. 43,42,524/-. HE AL SO ADDED RS. 43,42,524/- TO THE NET PROFIT WHILE COMPU TING THE BOOK OF THE ASSESSEE UNDER SECTION 115JB OF THE ACT . THE AR VEHEMENTLY ARGUED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS INVESTED ITS FUNDS IN EQUITY SHARES OF COMPANIES WHICH ARE HELD EITHER AS INVESTMENTS OR STOCK IN TRADE AND IN UNITS OF MUTUAL FUNDS . THE AMOUNT HELD AS INVESTMENT AND AS STOCK IN TRADE IS AS FOLLOWS: PARTICULARS AS ON 31.03.2009 AMOUNT RS. AS ON 31.03.2008 AMOUNT RS. SHARES HELD AS INVESTMENT 283,423,971 98,864,958 WALCHAND KAMDHENU COMMERCIALS P LTD ITA 4822/M/2012 3 SHARES HELD AS STOCK IN TRADE 3,774,969 5,967,523 TOTAL 287,198,940 104,832,481 5. IN REGARD TO THE TAX FREE INCOME EARNED AS AFORESAID , IT WAS SUBMITTED BEFORE THE AO THAT, - NO EXPENDITURE IS INCURRED TO EARN THE SAID TAX FREE INCOME - THE ASSESSEE IN FACT HAS NO CONTROL OVER THE EARNING OF DIVIDEND INCOME. THE ASSESSEE IS ONLY ENTITLED TO RECEIVE THE DIVIDEND INCOME IN CASE AND AS AND WHEN IT IS DECLARED BY THE COMPANY. - NO FURTHER EFFORTS OR COST IS REQUIRED TO BE INCURRED BY THE ASSESSEE TO COLLECT THE DIVIDEND OR INTEREST INCOME. 6. IT WAS SUBMITTED BEFORE THE AO THAT SINCE NO EXPENDITURE IS INCURRED TO EARN TAX FREE DIVIDEND INCOM E NO DISALLOWANCE OF THE EXPENDITURE IS WARRANTED UNDER SECTION 14A OF THE ACT. IN THIS CONNECTION IT WAS FURTHER SUBMITTED BEFORE THE AO AS FOLLOWS: - IT IS NOT CORRECT TO PRESUME THAT DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY SOME EXPENDITURE IS ALWAYS INCURRED TO EARN TAX FREE INCOME AND HENCE THE SOME MUST BE DISALLOWED BY INVOKING SECTION 14A. - IT IS ALSO NOT CORRECT TO SAY THAT IN CASE NO DISALLOWANCE IS MADE UNDER SECTION 14A, IT WILL NULLIFY THE MANDATE OF THE SAID SECTION. - AS SUCH, FOR DISALLOWING ANY EXPENDITURE UNDER SECTION 14A A FINDING OF THE SAID EXPENDITURE HAVING BEEN INCURRED IS NECESSARY, AND IN CASE IT IS FOUND THAT FOR EARNING EXEMPTED INCOME NO EXPENDITURE HAS BEEN INCURRED, DISALLOWANCE UNDER SECTION 14A CANNOT BE MADE. 7. WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO THE AFORESAID, IT WAS FURTHER SUBMITTED BEFORE THE AO THAT THE RETURN OF INCOME FOR THE SAID YEAR W AS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ON 30.09.2009. AT THAT POINT OF TIME THE RE WAS NO CLARITY AS REGARDS THE INTERPRETATION OF THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 14A. AT THAT TIME AN APPEAL WAS PENDING BEFORE THE HONBLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF GODREJ & B OYCE MFG. CO. LTD. IN WHICH AMONG OTHER THINGS THE FOLLOWING WAS WALCHAND KAMDHENU COMMERCIALS P LTD ITA 4822/M/2012 4 CHALLENGED WHETHER PROVISIONS OF SUB-SECTION (2) & (3) OF SECTION 14A ARE CONSTITUTIONALLY VALID AND WHETHER RULE 8D IS ULTRA VIRES THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 14A. IN VIEW OF THE AFORESAID PENDING APPEAL AND TO KEEP THE ISSUE ALIVE, THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT OFFERED ANY AMOUNT FOR DISALLOWANCE UNDER SECTION 14A OF THE ACT. WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO THE AFORESAID, IT WAS FURTHER SUBMITTE D BEFORE THE AO THAT IN CASE ANY AMOUNT OF EXPENDITUR E IS TO BE DISALLOWED UNDER SECTION 14A OF THE ACT, TH E SAID DISALLOWANCE MAY BE WORKED OUT AS FOLLOWS PARTICULARS AMOUNT IN RS. AMOUNT IN RS. EXPENSES FOR SALE AND PURCHASE OF SHARES 1,578 INTEREST PAID ON INTER-CORPORATE DEPOSITS(ICD) TAKEN -ASSOCIATED CAPSULES LTD. -HARDCASTLE & WAUD MFG. CO. LTD. -BRIGHT BROTHERS LTD. 21,72,462 10,36,849 5,54,795 37,64,106 TOTAL 37,65,684 IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT APART FROM THE AFORESAID NO OTHER EXPENDITURE CAN BE CONSIDERED TO HAVE BEEN INCURRED FOR EARNING TAX FREE INCOME. AS SUCH, IT WAS SUBMIT TED BEFORE THE AO THAT IN THE ASSESSEE'S CASE THERE IS NO GROUND TO WORK OUT A NOTIONAL DISALLOWANCE UNDER SECTION 14A BY INVOKING RULE 8D. 8. THE AO, AFTER CONSIDERING THE REPLY OF THE ASSESSEE, H ELD THAT THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION/RULE 8D ARE MANDATORY, HEN CE HE COMPUTED THE DISALLOWANCE IN ACCORDANCE WITH RULE 8D AND ARRIVED AT THE FIGURE OF RS. 43,42,524/-, WHICH HE DISALLOWED. 9. THE ASSESSEE WENT BEFORE THE CIT(A) BEFORE WHOM, THE ASSESSEE REITERATED ITS SUBMISSIONS THAT HE MADE BEFORE THE AO AND PLEADED THAT NO DISALLOWANCE WAS CALLED FOR BECAUSE NO DIRECT EXPENSE HAS BEEN INCURRED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR E ARNING THE DIVIDEND INCOME. WALCHAND KAMDHENU COMMERCIALS P LTD ITA 4822/M/2012 5 10. THE CIT(A), AFTER CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE, HELD, IT IS HELD THAT THE MANDATE OF SECTION 14A OF THE ACT IS TO PREVENT CLAIMS OF DEDUCTION OF EXPENDITURE INCUR RED IN RELATION TO THE INCOME WHICH DOES NOT FORM PART OF THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. IN THE PRESENT CASE, THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT ESTABLI SH THE NEXUS BETWEEN THE ENTIRE CAPITAL BEING INVESTED IN SECURITIES AND THAT IT WAS IMPOSSIBLE TO BELIEVE TH AT OUT OF THE COMMON HOTCH POTCH OF THE FUNDS, THE ENTIRE CAPITAL WOULD HAVE GONE INTO THE INVESTMENT IN SHARES WITHO UT A PART OF THE SAME GOING TO THE BUSINESS, ALSO IT WAS NOT POSSIBLE THAT THE ENTIRE INCOME WOULD HAVE BEEN INV ESTED IN SHARES AND DEBENTURES AND SHARE APPLICATION MONE Y ESPECIALLY WHEN THE ASSESSEE HIMSELF WAS NOT CATEGORICAL AS TO HOW MUCH OF THE SUM HAD BEEN INVESTED IN BUSINESS. 7.2.2 THE HON'BLE CALCUTTA HIGH COURT IN THE CASE O F DHAPA & SONS VS CIT REPORTED IN [(2011) 54 DTR (CAL ) 345] HAS HELD THAT MERE FACT THAT SHARES WERE OLD A ND NOT ACQUIRED RECENTLY IS IMMATERIAL. IT WAS FOR THE ASSESSEE TO SHOW BY PRODUCTION OF MATERIAL THAT THE SHARES WERE ACQUIRED FROM THE FUNDS AVAILABLE IN IT S HANDS AT RELEVANT POINT OF TIME WITHOUT TAKING ANY BENEFIT OF ANY LOAN OR THAT THE LOAN HAD ALREADY BE EN REPAID AND THAT NO INTEREST WAS PAID BY IT FOR ACQU IRING SHARES IN THE RELEVANT YEAR. IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY SUCH MATERIAL INTEREST PAYABLE BY THE ASSESSEE WAS TO BE DISALLOWED U/S.14A OF THE ACT HAVING REGARD TO INVESTMENTS IN SHARES AND TOTAL INTEREST BEARING FU NDS. FURTHERMORE, THE HON'BLE KERALA HIGH COURT IN THE C ASE OF CIT VS SMT LEENA RAMACHANDRAN REPORT IN [(2010) 45 DTR (KER) 372] HELD THAT IN A CASE WHERE ASSESSEE RECEIVED A DIVIDEND OF RS. 36,81,596/- AND NO OTHER BENEFITS WAS DERIVED FROM THE COMPANY FOR THE BUSIN ESS CARRIED OUT BY THE ASSESSEE AS THE ENTIRE FUNDS WAS UTILIZED FOR ACQUISITION OF SHARES THE ENTIRE INTER EST PAID ON BORROWED FUNDS WAS HELD TO BE CORRECTLY DISALLOW ED U/S.14A OF THE ACT. 7.2.3 SECONDLY, EVEN THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT GIVEN ANY DETAILS TO WORK OUT THE DIRECT NEXUS OF THE INTERES T EXPENDITURE RELATED TO THE EXEMPTED INCOME WHICH WA S NOT INCLUDED IN THE TOTAL TAXABLE INCOME. THE ASSES SEE'S PRESENT CASE IS COVERED BY SUB SECTION (3) OF SECTI ON 14A OF THE ACT BECAUSE THE ASSESSEE HAD CLAIMED BEFORE THE AO THAT NO EXPENDITURE WAS INCURRED BY IT IN RELATI ON TO THE EXEMPTED INCOME WHICH DID NOT FORM PORT OF TOTA L INCOME. THE ASSESSEE'S CLAIM IS ALSO COVERED BY SUB SECTION (2) OF SECTION 14A OF THE ACT BECAUSE THE A O WAS NOT SATISFIED WITH THE CORRECTNESS OF THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE IN RESPECT OF SUCH EXPENDITURE AS NOTED BY THE AO IN PARA 4. ACCORDINGLY, I AGREE WITH THE A0'S VI EW THAT IN VIEW OF THE DEAR CUT DECISION OF THE HON'BL E SPECIAL BENCH IN THE CASE OF DAGA CAPITAL MANAGEMEN T REPORTED IN (2008) 26 SOT 603 (MUM) FOR THE PURPOSE OF DISALLOWANCE, THE REFERENCE IN RULE 8D(2)(II) IS 'V ALUE OF WALCHAND KAMDHENU COMMERCIALS P LTD ITA 4822/M/2012 6 INVESTMENT' AND NOT THE SHARE HELD AS INVESTMENT. THEREFORE, EVEN THE SHARES HELD AS STOCK IN TRADE S HALL BE CONSIDERED FOR THE PURPOSE OF DISALLOWANCE. IT I S FURTHER HELD THAT IN THE FORMULA PRESCRIBED UNDER R ULE 8D(2)(II) 'A X B /C' B DENOTES AVERAGE VALUE OF INVESTMENT, INCOME FROM WHICH IT DOES NOT OR SHALL NOT FORM PORT OF THE TOTAL INCOME AS APPEARING IN THE B ALANCE SHEET OF THE ASSESSEE ON THE FIRST DOTE AND THE LAS T DATE OF THE PREVIOUS YEAR; 'C' INCLUDES THE AVERAGE OF T HE TOTAL ASSETS AS APPEARING IN THE BALANCE SHEET OF THE ASSESSEE, ON THE FIRST DATE AND THE LAST DATE OF TH E PREVIOUS YEAR. THE ASSESSEE HAS INCLUDED STOCK IN T RADE WHILE FURNISHING THE DETAILS OF 'C' WHICH IS THE DENOMINATOR. THEREFORE, IT SHOULD INCLUDE VALUE OF STOCK- IN-TRADE WHILE FURNISHING THE DETAILS OF 'B' ALSO W HICH IS THE NUMERATOR IN THIS CASE. THE SAME IS AMPLY CLEAR IN THE RULE 8(2)(II) OF IT RULES, 1962. HAVING REGARD TO THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE DISALLOWANCE OF RS. 43,43,524/- AS WORKED OUT AND DISALLOWED BY THE AO IN THE RELEVANT ASSESSMENT ORDER IS CONFIRMED. THEREFORE, GROUNDS OF APPEAL NO . 1 TO 6 STAND DISMISSED . 11. THE CIT(A), THEREFORE, SUSTAINED THE OBSERVATIONS OF TH E AO. 12. AGAINST THIS ORDER OF THE CIT(A), THE ASSESSEE IS NOW BEFORE THE ITAT. 13. BEFORE US, THE AR REITERATED HIS ARGUMENTS, AS MADE BEFORE THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES AND SUBMITTED A LIST OF CAS E LAWS, WHICH HAS BEEN RELIED UPON. 14. THE AR SUBMITTED THAT THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES HAVE NOT CONSIDERED THE MAIN ARGUMENT THAT THE ASSESSEE DID NOT MAKE ANY EXPENDITURE TO EARN THE DISALLOWED INCOME. THE AR ALSO PLACED BEFORE US THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE IN ITA NO. 3826/MUM/2013, WHEREIN THE BENCH OF THE ITAT MUMBAI, HELD, IN SO FAR AS THE DISALLOWANCE U/S. 14A R.W. RULE 8D IS CONCERNED, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE STRONGL Y SUBMITTED THAT THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES HAVE FAILED TO APPRECIATE THE EVIDENCES WHICH WERE PRODUCED IN THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT AS WELL AS APPELLATE PROCEEDIN GS. IT IS THE SAY OF THE LD. COUNSEL THAT PROVISIONS OF SEC. 14A(3) WOULD APPLY ONLY IF THE OFFICER HAVING REGAR D TO THE ACCOUNTS OF THE ASSESSEE, IS NOT SATISFIED WITH THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE THAT NO EXPENDITURE HAS BEEN INCURRED TO EARN TAX FREE INCOME. WALCHAND KAMDHENU COMMERCIALS P LTD ITA 4822/M/2012 7 9. PER CONTRA, THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE STRONGLY SUPPORTED THE FINDINGS OF THE LOWER AUTHOR ITIES. 10. WE HAVE CAREFULLY PERUSED THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. WE FIND FORCE IN THE CONTENTION OF THE LD. COUNSEL. THE AO HAS NOT REFERRED TO THE BALANCE SHEET FIGURES OF THE ASSESSEE. THE AO HAS ALSO NOT GIVEN ANY FINDINGS WHETHER THE BORROWED FUNDS WERE ALSO USED FOR MAKING THE INVESTMENTS. THE AO HAS ALSO NO T CONSIDERED THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE THAT THE INVESTMENTS HAVE BEEN MADE OUT OF OWN FUNDS. IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, IN OUR CONSIDERED OPINION, THI S ISSUE NEEDS TO BE READJUDICATED AFRESH. WE, ACCORDINGLY S ET ASIDE THIS ISSUE TO THE FILE OF THE AO. THE AO IS D IRECTED TO SHOW THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS ACTUALLY INCURRED CER TAIN EXPENDITURE FOR EARNING THE EXEMPT INCOME CONSIDERI NG THE FACTS AND THE FIGURES OF THE BALANCE SHEET OF T HE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED TO FILE NECESSAR Y DETAILS BEFORE THE AO. NEEDLESS TO MENTION, THE AO SHALL GIVE A REASONABLE AND FAIR OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEA RD TO THE ASSESSEE. THIS GROUND OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWE D FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. 15. THE AR, THEREFORE, PLEADED THAT THE CASE BE RESTORE D TO THE AO TO BE DECIDED IN LINE WITH THE DECISION OF THE ORDER O F THE ITAT. 16. THE DR RELIED ON THE ORDER OF THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES. 17. AFTER HEARING THE PARTIES, WE DO NOT FIND ANY REASON T O GIVE A DIFFERENT FINDING, THEN THE ONE ALREADY GIVEN BY THE ITAT, AS MENTIONED ABOVE AND, THEREFORE, WE RESTORE THE ISSUE BAC K TO THE AO, TO ADJUDICATE ON THE COMPUTATION OF 14A AS PER LAW A ND IN LINE WITH THE DIRECTION OF THE ITAT IN ITA NO. 3862/MUM/2013. 18. RESULTANTLY, APPEAL AS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE STANDS ALLO WED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 16 TH JANUARY, 2015. SD/- SD/- ( ) ( ) & & & & -. -. -. -. -. -. -. -. (R C SHARMA) ( VIVEK VARMA ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER J UDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI, DATE: 16 TH JANUARY, 2015 WALCHAND KAMDHENU COMMERCIALS P LTD ITA 4822/M/2012 8 !/ COPY TO:- 1) / THE ASSESSEE. 2) / THE RESPONDENT. 3) THE CIT(A)-9, MUMBAI. 4) THE CIT- 5, MUMBAI. 5) / 01 !# , , / THE D.R. G BENCH, MUMBAI. 6) 123 4 COPY TO GUARD FILE. -5# / BY ORDER / / TRUE COPY / / 6 / 7 , DY. / ASSTT. REGISTRAR I.T.A.T., MUMBAI * *CHAVAN, SR.PS WALCHAND KAMDHENU COMMERCIALS P LTD ITA 4822/M/2012 9 # 9 # 9 # 9 # 9. .. . SR.N -5 ';#9 -5 ';#9 -5 ';#9 -5 ';#9 EPISODE OF AN ORDER -# -# -# -# DATE . 5< . 5< . 5< . 5< INITIALS (=! (=! (=! (=! CONCERNED 1 DRAFT ON HANDWRITTEN MANUSCRIPT 09.01.2015 . # . SR.PS 2 DRAFT PLACED BEFORE AUTHOR 13.01.2015 . # . SR.PS 3 DRAFT PROPOSED & PLACED BEFORE THE SECOND MEMBER / JM 4 DRAFT DISCUSSED/APPROVED BY SECOND MEMBER / AM 5 APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.PS/PS . # . SR.PS 6 KEPT FOR PRONOUNCEMENT ON . # . SR.PS 7 FILE SENT TO THE BENCH CLERK . # . SR.PS 8 DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK 9 DATE OF DISPATCH OF ORDER