ITO 18(3)2), MUMBAI V. KISHANRAO M PALWE, MUMBAI

ITA 6026/MUM/2009

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 134 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8385 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 3 month(s) 9 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 23-02-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2003-2004
• Appeal Filed On: 13-11-2009
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: K RAVIKIRAN
• Keywords: Corroborative evidences

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH A MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI R.S. SYAL (AM) AND SMT. ASHA VIJAYARAGH AVAN (JM) ITA NO. 6026/MUM/2009 ASSESSMENT YEAR- 2003-04 THE ITO - 18(3)(2), PIRAMAL CHAMBERS, LALBAUG, MUMBAI-400 012 VS. SHRI KISHANRAO M . PALWE, FLAT NO. 23, B-WING, 2 ND FLOOR, SHRI GANESH APARTMENT, MAHIM(W), MUMBAI-400 016 PAN-ALHPP 6770C (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY: SHRI K. RAVIKIRAN RESPONDENT BY: NONE O R D E R PER ASHA VIJAYARAGHAVAN (JM) THIS APPEAL PREFERRED BY THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AG AINST THE ORDER DATED 21.8.2009 PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A)- XXVIII FO R THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2003-04. 2. NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE THEREFOR E WE HEARD THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE AND ARE DISPOSING OF TH E MATTER EX PARTE ON MERIT. 3. IT IS SEEN FROM THE BALANCE SHEET FILED ALONG WI TH THE RETURN, THE ASSESSEE HAS SHOWN LOAN OF RS.1,78,86,753/- AND PAI D INTEREST OF RS.15,37,354/-. A LETTER DATED 05.01.2005 WAS SENT TO THE ASSESSEE BY SPEED POST. THE CONTENT OF THE SAID LETTER IS AS UNDER :- ON VERIFICATION AND SCRUTINY OF YOUR RETURN OF INC OME FOR A.Y.2003- 04 ALONGWITH BALANCE SHEET AND PROFIT & LOSS A/C, F OLLOWING DETAILS ARE REQUIRED TO BE PRODUCE TO COMPLETE THE ASSESSME NT. 1) THE PURPOSE OF UNSECURED LOAN AMOUNTING TO RS.1,64, 87,630/- ALONGWITH LOAN CONFIRMATION IN THE PRESCRIBED FORM WITH ITA NO. 6026/M/09 2 PERMANENT ACCOUNT NUMBER (PAN) OF THE PERSON FROM W HOM LOAN RECEIVED. 2) RATE OF INTEREST PAID AMOUNTING TO RS.15,37,354/- A ND TO WHOM THE SAID INTEREST PAID. 3) WHEN THE AMOUNT OF RS.17,08,560/- DEPOSITED IN AURA NGABAD JAINA GRAMIN BANK, SOMNATH NAGAR, BRANCH, AURANGABA D, PLEASE PRODUCE COPY OF CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE BA NK. A COPY OF THE ABOVE LETTER WAS PERSONALLY HANDED OV ER TO THE ASSESSEES REPRESENTATIVE SHRI M.N. SINGH, ADVOCATE , WHEN HE ATTENDED ON 09.01.2006. HE WAS ASKED TO FURNISH THE DETAILS IN RESPECT OF RECEIPT OF LOAN AMOUNT AND OTHER DETAILS AS PER ORDER SHEET NOTING DATE 09.01.2006. THEREAFTER, NOBODY AT TENDED, NOR ANY EXPLANATION WAS FURNISHED IN THIS REGARD. 4. THE A.O. HELD AS FOLLOWS: THE BURDEN OF PROVING A FACT RESTS ON THE ASSESSEE. SINCE THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO ATTEND OR TO PROVIDE ANY EVIDENC E IN RESPECT OF LOAN, THE INTEREST CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE TO THE T UNE OF RS.15,17,354/- CANNOT BE TREATED AS GENUINE AND IT WILL BE HIS OWN FUNDS UTILIZED BY THE ASSESSEE. THEREFORE, THE SAME IS ADDED TO THE TOTAL INCOME AS INCOME FROM UN-DISCLOSED SOURCES. 5. WITH RESPECT TO SECOND ISSUE REGARDING ADDITION OF AGRICULTURAL INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES, THE AO SENT QUESTIONNAIR E AS FOLLOWS: 1) DETAILS OF AGRICULTURAL LAND WITH COPY OF 7/12 EXTR ACT, DETAILS OF SALE PROCEEDS WITH BILLS/VOUCHERS, DETAILS OF EXPEN SES INCURRED FOR AGRICULTURAL, NAME OF CROPS PRODUCED. PLEASE LE T ME KNOW WHO IS CULTIVATING IF NOT PERSONALLY NAME & ADDRESS OF THE CULTIVATOR. 2) DETAILS OF INVESTMENT IN AGRICULTURAL LAND WITH DAT E OF INVESTMENT WITH DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE AND SOURCE OF INVESTMENT. 3) TOTAL ANNUAL WITHDRAWALS OF YOURS AND YOUR FAMILY M EMBERS. WHAT IS YOUR TOTAL FAMILY EXPENDITURE PER ANNUM. ITA NO. 6026/M/09 3 6. THE A.O. FURTHER HELD AS FOLLOWS: THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO SHOWN AGRICULTURAL INCOME OF RS.7,01,932/-. NO DETAIL IN SUPPORT OF AGRICULTURAL INCOME RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN SUBMITTED THOUGH HE WAS RE PEATEDLY ASKED TO FURNISH THE SAME. VIDE LETTER DATED 05.01. 2006 AT SR.NO.4, HE WAS ASKED TO FURNISH COPY OF 7/12 EXTRACT, DETAI LS OF SALE PROCEEDS WITH BILLS/VOUCHERS, DETAILS OF EXPENSES I NCURRED FOR AGRICULTURAL, NATURE OF CROPS PRODUCED AND WHETHER THE CULTIVATION IS DONE PERSONALLY OR THROUGH SOMEBODY ELSE. SO FAR, N OBODY ATTENDED NOR ANY DETAILS HAVE BEEN FIELD. IN ABSENCE OF ANY SUPPORTING EVIDENCE TO SHOW THE ASSESSEE HAS DERIVED INCOME FR OM AGRICULTURAL ACTIVITIES, I TREAT THIS INCOME AS INCOME FROM OTH ER SOURCES AND TAXED ACCORDINGLY. 7. ON FURTHER APPEAL TO LD.CIT(A), THE CIT(A) HELD AS FOLLOWS: VIDE REMAND REPORT DATED 13.09.2006 THE AO REPORTE D THAT THE EXPENDITURE IS GENUINE, THE RELEVANT PORTION OF REM AND REPORT IS AN UNDER: THE DISALLOWANCE OF RS.15,37,354/- ON ACCOUNT OF INTEREST PAYMENT WAS MADE BY THE AO AS THE ASSESSEE HAD FAILED TO PROVIDE THE DETAILS REGARDING THEIR GENUI NENESS. AS PER THE DETAILS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE UN DERSIGNED IT IS NOTICED THAT THE INTEREST PAYMENT OF RS.15,37,35 4/- COMPRISED OF RS.14,44,382/- PAID TO THE FIRM M/S. K .M. PALWE, IN WHICH THE ASSESSEE IS ONE OF THE PARTNERS. IN TH IS REGARD THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THE CONFIRMATION FROM THE AFORES AID CONCERN. FURTHER, THE BALANCE INTEREST EXPENSE OF RS.92,972/ - COMPRISES OF INTEREST PAYMENT OF RS.85,947/- TO THE DEGIRI NAGRI SAHKARI BANK LTD., AURANGABAD AND RS.7,025/- TO STATE BANK OF HYDERABAD, PARBHANI. THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED COPY OF BANK STATEMENTS OF THE RESPECTIVE BANKS AND THE INT EREST PAYMENTS ARE DEBITED TO THE ASSESSEES ACCOUNT. THE SAME IS FOUND TO BE A GENUINE EXPENDITURE INCURRED BY THE A SSESSEE. AS THE INTEREST PAID BY THE ASSESSEE IS TAXED AS RE CEIPT IN THE HANDS OF THE FIRM, AND IS SATISFACTORILY EXPLAINED WITH T HE HELP OF COPIES OF LOAN ITA NO. 6026/M/09 4 ACCOUNT AND ALSO IN VIEW OF THE REMAND REPORT OF TH E AO, HENCE THE ADDITION MADE BY THE AO ON INTEREST OF RS.15,37,354 /- IS DELETED . 8. FURTHER THE LD. CIT(A) HELD WITH REFERENCE TO TH E TREATMENT GIVEN BY THE AO TO AGRICULTURAL INCOME AS INCOME FROM OTH ER SOURCES AS FOLLOWS: THE ASSESSEE HAD SHOWN AGRICULTURAL INCOME OF RS.7, 01,932/- . THE AO TREATED THE SAME AS INCOME FROM OTHER SOUR CES ON THE GROUND THAT THE ASSESSEE DID NOT SUBMIT ANY DETAILS , DID NOT FURNISH COPY OF 7/12 EXTRACT, DETAILS OF SALE PROCEEDS WITH BILLS AND VOUCHERS, DETAILS OF EXPENSES INCURRED, NATURE OF C ROPS GROWN, CULTIVATION WAS DONE PERSONALLY OR THROUGH SOMEBODY ELSE? ETC. ETC DURING THE COURSE OF APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS, THE ASS ESSEE SUBMITTED THE COPY OF SALE DEED EVIDENCING PURCHASE OF 25 ACRES OF AGRICULTURAL LAND. THE COPY OF 7/12 EXTRACT WAS ALS O SUBMITTED WHEREN IT WAS RECORDED THAT CROPS LIKE SOYA BEAN, BANANA, SWEET LIME, GROUNDNUT ETC. WERE GROWN ON THE LAND. THE AO IN HIS REMAND REPORT DATED 13.07.2006 HAD MENTIONED THAT THE ASSE SSEE PRODUCED COPY OF 7/12 EXTRACT, PROOF OF AGRICULTURAL RECEIPT S, LEDGER EXTRACT OF INCOME AND EXPENSES OF AGRICULTURAL INCOME, BILLS O F EXPENSES RELATED TO AGRICULTURAL PRODUCE, BANK STATEMENT AND AGREEMENT OF PURCHASE OF AGRICULTURAL LAND ETC. THE AO ALSO RECO RDED THAT THE DETAILS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE INDICATE THAT ASSESSE E OWNS AGRICULTURAL LAND, HOWEVER, SINCE THE RECEIPTS ARE IN CASH, LETTERS WERE ISSUED TO THE CONCERNED PARTIES SEEKING THEIR CONFIRMATIONS. DURING THE COURSE OF APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS, THE ASS ESSEE SUBMITTED THE COPIES OF BILLS EVIDENCING THE SALE O F AGRICULTURAL. AFTER CERTAIN AGRICULTURAL EXPENSES, THE ASSESSEE O FFERED RS.7,01,932/- AS AGRICULTURAL INCOME. 9. VIDE REMAND REPORT DATED 18/08/2006 THE AO GAVE HIS REPORT ON AGRICULTURAL INCOME AS UNDER: REGARDING THE DISALLOWANCE OF RS.7,01,932/- THE ASS ESSEE HAD PRODUCED COPY OF 7/12 EXTRACT, PROOF OF AGRICUL TURAL RECEIPTS, LEDGER EXTRACTS OF INCOME & EXPENSES OF AGRICULTURA L INCOME, BILLS OF EXPENSES, BANK STATEMENT AND AGREEMENT OF PURCHASE OF AGRICULTURAL LAND ETC. ITA NO. 6026/M/09 5 THOUGH ALL THE ABOVE DETAILS WERE EXAMINED, IT WAS FELT NECESSARY TO CROSS VERIFY THE ASSESSEES CLAIM FROM THE PARTIES WHO HAD ISSUED THE BILLS AS THE PAYMENTS RECEIVED BY TH E ASSESSEE WERE IN CASH. ACCORDINGLY NOTICES U/S.133(6) WERE ISSUED TO THE F OLLOWING PARTIES TO CONFIRM THE TRANSACTIONS. 1. ABDUL RAZZAK HAJI SAYED NABI. 2. PRINCIPAL OFFICER, KRISHI UTPANN BAZAR SAMITI, PARA BHANI THE NOTICES WERE ISSUED TO THE ABOVE PARTIES CALLIN G FOR THEIR CONFIRMATIONS. COPIES OF ALL THE BILLS SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE WERE ALSO FORWARDED TO THE PRINCIPAL OFFICER OF M/S.KRIS HI UTPANN BAZAR SAMITI. IN RESPONSE TO THE SAID NOTICE, NO CONFIRMATION WAS RECEIVED FROM SHRI ABDUL RAZZAK HAJI SAYED NABI TILL DATE. THE AS SESSEE WAS TELEPHONICALLY INFORMED ABOUT THE NON-RECEIPT OF TH E CONFIRMATION FROM THE AFORESAID PARTY AND WAS ASKED TO SUBMIT TH E SAME. HOWEVER, TILL DATE NO RESPONSE HAS BEEN RECEIVED FR OM THE ASSESSEE. REPLY IS RECEIVED FROM PARABHANI KRISHI UTPANN BAZA R SAMITI THROUGH THEIR LETTER DATED 22.07.2006, WHEREIN THE SAID SAMITI HAS VEHEMENTLY DENIED TO HAVE REGISTERED ANY SUCH TRANS ACTIONS. FURTHER, IT IS ALSO MENTIONED THAT THE M/S. SHELKE AND SHELKE CO. AND RATHI & SONS ARE ALSO NOT REGISTERED AS LICENSE D COMMISSION AGENTS WITH THE SAMITI. IT IS ALSO GIVEN TO UNDERST AND THAT THOUGH M/S. KHAKRE & CO. ARE REGISTERED AS LICENSED COMMIS SION AGENTS, THE BOOK NO.811 HAS NOT BEEN ISSUED BY THE SAMITI T O THE SAID AGENT. VIDE LETTER DATED 06.08.2008 THE ASSESSEE HAD SUBMI TTED THAT PARBHANI KRISHI UPTANN BAZAR SAMITI HAD FURNISHED I NFORMATION IN THE CASE OF KRISHANRAO MAROTRAO PALVE (IE.E. KISHAN RAO SON OF MAROTRAO) AND NOT IN THE CASE OF APPELLANT KISHANRA O MAMTAJI (I.E. KISHANRAO SON OF MARATRAO), HENCE THE LETTER GIVEN BY THE SAMITI CAN NOT BE RELIED UPON AS THE INFORMATION THEREIN DOES NOT PERTAIN TO THE APPELLANT. THE ASSESSEE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THOU GH M/S. SHELKE & SHELKE CO. AND M/S. RATHI & SONS ARE NOT REGISTE RED WITH THE SAMITI, THEY ARE DOING THE BUSINESS FROM THE SAME P REMISES OF THE SAMITI. THE ASSESSEE FURTHER SUBMITTED THE FACT THA T ALL THE PARTIES TO WHOM SALES WERE MADE ARE EXISTING IS NOT DISPUTED B Y THE AO.FURTHER, THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED A COPY OF LOAN A CCOUNT WITH DEVGIRI NAGARI SAHAKARI BANK LTD., AURANGABAD, EVID ENCING THE FACT ITA NO. 6026/M/09 6 THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD TAKEN LOAN FOR THE PURPOSE OF LAYING PVC PIPES TO PROVIDE DRIP IRRIGATION ETC. AMOUNTING TO RS.3 LAKHS. 10. THE LD. CIT(A) HELD AS FOLLOWS: KEEPING IN VIEW, THE ISSUES PERTAINING TO AGRICULTU RAL INCOME MENTIONED PRECEDING PARAS, IT IS EVIDENT THAT THE A PPELLANT OWNS 25 ACRES OF AGRICULTURAL LAND AND PROVIDED DRIP IRRIGA TION FACILITIES BY LAYING PVC PIPES AND PROVIDING DRIP IRRIGATION. THE COP OF 7/12 EXTRACT RECORDED THAT CROPS LIKE SOYA BEAN, BANANA, SWEET LIME, GROUNDNUT ETC. WERE GROWN. IT IS EXTREMELY DIFFICUL T TO COME TO CONCLUSION AS TO WHAT WOULD BE THE YIELD/INCOME PER ACRE AS THE SAME DEPENDS ON SEVERAL FACTORS LIKE CLIMATE CONDIT ION, USE OF HIGH YIELDING VARITIES, USE OF FERTILIZERS, IRRIGATION F ACILITIES AND PEST MANAGEMENT. KEEPING IN VIEW THE EXTENT OF LAND, THE FACT THAT THE LAND WAS IRRIGATED, AND TYPES OF CROPS GROWN, THE I NCOME SHOWN BY THE ASSESSEE OF RS.7,00,000/- FROM 25 ACRES OF LAND CAN NOT BE CONSIDERED AS EXCESSIVE, HOWEVER, SINCE THE PARTIES TO WHOM THE LETTERS WERE ISSUED BY THE AO HAD NOT RESPONDED AND AS THE PAYMENTS WERE STATED TO HAVE BEEN RECEIVED IN CASH, I CONSIDER IT IS APPROPRIATE TO TREAT 25% OF AGRICULTURAL INCOME I.E . RS.1,75,000/- AS INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES. 11. AGGRIEVED REVENUE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US AND HA S RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS: 1. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN L AW THE CIT(A) ERRED IN DELETING AN ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF INTERES T ON LOAN PAID TO FIRM M/S. K.M. PALWE OF RS. 15,37,354/-. 2. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN L AW THE CIT(A) ERRED IN DIRECTING THE AO TO TREAT ONLY 25% OUT OF AN ADDITION OF RS. 7,01,932/- OF AGRICULTURAL INCOME AS INCOME FRO M OTHER SOURCES WITHOUT APPRECIATING THE FACT THAT THE ASSE SSEE DID NOT PRODUCE SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE TO PROVE HIS CLAIM. 12. WE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES. THE LD. CIT(A) HAD C ALLED FOR THE REMAND REPORT AND IN THE REMAND REPORT THE AO STATE D THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED COPY OF BANK STATEMENTS OF THE RESPECTIVE BANKS AND THE INTEREST PAYMENTS ARE DEBITED TO THE ASSESSEES ACC OUNT. THE SAME IS FOUND TO BE A GENUINE EXPENDITURE INCURRED BY THE A SSESSEE. FURTHER THE ITA NO. 6026/M/09 7 INTEREST PAID BY THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN TAXED IN TH E HANDS OF THE FIRM. THE LD. CIT(A) HAD AFTER DETAILED STUDY DELETED THE ADDITION OF INTEREST OF RS. 15,37,354/-. WE CONFIRM THE ORDER OF THE LD. C IT(A) AND DISMISS THE GROUND RAISED BY THE REVENUE ON THIS ISSUE. 13. WITH RESPECT TO 2 ND GROUND, THE ASSESSEE HAS PRODUCED THE FOLLOWING BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A): I) COPY OF PURCHASE DEED OF 25 ACRES OF AGRICULTURAL L AND; II) COPY OF 7/12 EXTRACT WHERE IT WAS RECORDED THAT CRO PS LIKE SOYA BEAN, BANANA, SWEET LIME, GROUNDNUT ETC. WERE CULTIVATED ON THE LAND III) LEDGER EXTRACTS OF INCOME AND EXPENSES OF AGRICULTU RAL INCOME IV) BILL OF EXPENSES RELATED TO AGRICULTURAL PRODUCE. V) BANK STATEMENT 14. THE ASSESSEE ALSO SUBMITTED BEFORE THE LD. CIT( A) COPY OF LOAN ACCOUNT WITH DEVAGIRI NAGRI SAHKARI BANK LTD WHERE 3 LAKHS HAD BEEN TAKEN BY ASSESSEE FOR LAYING PVC PIPES. THE PARTIE S TO WHOM NOTICES WERE ISSUED HAD NOT RESPONDED AND PAYMENTS WERE STA TED TO HAVE BEEN RECEIVED BY CASH , THE LD. CIT(A) CONSIDERED IT APP ROPRIATE TO TREAT 25% OF AGRICULTURAL INCOME OF RS. 1,75,000/- AS INCOME FRO M OTHER SOURCES. 15. IT WAS FELT NECESSARY TO CROSS VERIFY THE ASSES SEES CLAIM FROM THE PARTIES WHO HAD ISSUED THE BILLS AS THE PAYMENTS RE CEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE WERE IN CASH. ACCORDINGLY NOTICES U/S.133( 6) WERE ISSUED TO THE FOLLOWING PARTIES TO CONFIRM THE TRANSACTIONS. 1. ABDUL RAZZAK HAJI SAYED NABI. 2. PRINCIPAL OFFICER, KRISHI UTPANN BAZAR SAMITI, PARA BHANI ITA NO. 6026/M/09 8 16. WE FIND NO INFIRMITY WITH THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A). AS OBSERVED BY HIM THE AGRICULTURAL INCOME OF 7 LAKHS FROM 25 A CRES OF LAND IS NOT EXCESSIVE TAKING INTO ACCOUNT THE CROPS GROWN BY TH E ASSESSEE AND ALSO THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS TAKEN EFFORT TO IRRIGATE AND CULTIVATE THE CROPS WITH LOT OF CARE. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS RIGHTLY MADE AN AD DITION OF RS. 1,75,000/- ON APPREHENSION OF INFLATED AGRICULTURAL INCOME AS THERE HAS BEEN NO RESPONSE FROM PARTIES TO WHOM SUMMONS WERE ISSUED A ND ALSO THE FACT THAT SOME PAYMENT APPEAR TO HAVE BEEN RECEIVED IN CASH. THEREFORE WE CONFIRM THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) AND DISMISS THE GROUND OF APPEAL OF THE REVENUE. 17. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON THIS 23 RD DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2011 SD/- SD/- ( R.S. SYAL) (ASHA VIJAYARAGHAVAN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI, DATED 23 RD FEBRUARY, 2011 RJ COPY TO : 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT-CONCERNED 4. THE CIT(A)-CONCERNED 5. THE DR A BENCH TRUE COPY BY ORDER ASSTT. REGISTRAR, I.T.A.T, MUMBAI ITA NO. 6026/M/09 9 DATE INITIALS 1 DRAFT DICTATED ON: 1 1 . 02 .201 1 SR. PS/PS 2. DRAFT PLACED BEFORE AUT HOR: 1 7 .02.2011 ______ SR. PS/PS 3. DRAFT PROPOSED & PLACED BEFORE THE SECOND MEMBER: _________ ______ JM/AM 4. DRAFT DISCUSSED/APPROVED BY SECOND MEMBER: _________ ______ JM/AM 5. APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR. PS/PS: _________ ______ SR. PS/PS 6. KE PT FOR PRONOUNCEMENT ON: _________ ______ SR. PS/PS 7. FILE SENT TO THE BENCH CLERK: _________ ______ SR. PS/PS 8. DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK: _________ ______ 9. 10. DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO AR DATE OF DISPATCH OF ORDER: _________ _ _____