ACIT, New Delhi V. M/s. Arintex Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 994/DEL/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 119 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1062 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 9 month(s) 10 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-11-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 18-02-2015
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: APARNA KARAN
• Assessee Lawyers: R R K GUPTA
• Keywords: Unexplained cash credit; Search and seizure; Share purchase agreement; Block assessment; Documents seized
• Section: 32; 132; 12; 10; 143(3); 153A; 14A

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: A NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI R.K.PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.-993,994/DEL/2015 ( A.Y.: 2005-06, 2006-07) ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-30 NEW DELHI VS ARINTEX LTD. LOTUS TOWER BASEMENT, COMMUNITY CENTRE, NEW FRIENDS COLONY, NEW DELHI PAN : AADCA5442J ASSESSEE BY R. R.K.GUPTA, ADV. & SOMIL AGARWAL REVENUE BY SMT. APARNA KARAN, CIT(DR) ORDER PER SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, J.M. ITA NO. 993/DEL/2015 IS DEPARTMENTS APPEAL PREFERR ED AGAINST ORDER DATED 11.11.2014 PASSED BY THE LD. CIT (APPEA LS)-XXXIII, NEW DELHI FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06 AND ITA NO. 994/D EL/2015 IS THE DEPARTMENTS APPEAL AGAINST ORDER DATED 11.11.2014 PASSED BY THE LD. CIT (APPEALS)-XXXIII, NEW DELHI FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07. BOTH THE APPEALS INVOLVE IDENTICAL QUESTIONS AND, T HEREFORE, THEY WERE DATE OF HEARING 20.09.2018 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 30.11.2018 2 ITA N O. 993,994/DEL/2015 (ARINTEX LTD.) HEARD TOGETHER AND THEY ARE BEING DISPOSED OF BY TH IS COMMON ORDER FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE. 2.0 THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT A SEARCH AND SEIZURE OPERATION U/S 132 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (HERE INAFTER CALLED AS THE ACT) WAS CONDUCTED BY THE INVESTIGATION WING OF THE DEPARTMENT ON 22.03.2011 IN THE AMTEK GROUP OF CASES. THE PREM ISES OF M/S. AMTEK AUTO LTD. WERE ALSO COVERED. THE DOCUMENTS BE LONGING TO THE ASSESSEE I.E. M/S. ARINTEX LTD. WERE ALSO FOUND AND SEIZED FROM THE PREMISES OF M/S. AMTEK AUTO LTD. IN WHOSE NAME THE SEARCH WARRANT OF AUTHORIZATION WAS ISSUED. NOTICES U/S 153C OF TH E ACT WERE ISSUED FOR BOTH THE YEARS. FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06, TH E RETURN WAS FILED DECLARING INCOME AT RS. NIL. FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 20 06-07, THE RETURN WAS FILED DECLARING INCOME OF RS. 41,600/-. THE ASS ESSMENT FOR AY 2005-06 WAS COMPLETED U/S 153C READ WITH SECTION 14 3(3) OF THE ACT AT AN INCOME OF RS. 63,31,500/- WHICH INCLUDED AN A DDITION OF RS. 61,31,500/- MADE U/S 68 OF THE ACT ON ACCOUNT OF UN EXPLAINED CASH CREDITORS AND A FURTHER DISALLOWANCE OF RS. 2,00,00 0/- U/S 14A OF THE ACT. IN ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07, THE ASSESSMENT WAS COMPLETED U/S 153C READ WITH SECTION 143(3) OF THE ACT AT AN INCO ME OF RS. 68,47,600/- WHICH COMPRISED OF ADDITION OF RS. 67,5 6,000/- U/S 68 OF THE ACT ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED CASH CREDITORS AND FURTHER DISALLOWANCE OF RS. 50,000/- U/S 14A OF THE ACT. 3 ITA N O. 993,994/DEL/2015 (ARINTEX LTD.) 2.1 THE ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER BEFORE THE LD. CIT (APPEALS). BEFORE THE LD. CIT (APPEALS), THE ASSESS EE SUBMITTED THAT THE SATISFACTION NOTE WAS RECORDED U/S 153C BY THE AO OF THE ASSESSEE COMPANY WHICH WAS CONTRARY TO THE PROVISIO NS OF SECTION 153C BECAUSE THE DOCUMENTS WERE SEIZED FROM M/S. AM TEK AUTO LTD. AND, THEREFORE, THE SATISFACTION NOTE SHOULD HAVE B EEN RECORDED IN THE CASE OF AMTEK AUTO LTD. BEING THE SEARCHED PERSON. THE LD. CIT (APPEALS) GAVE A CATEGORICAL FINDING THAT THE SATIS FACTION NOTE WAS NOT RECORDED IN THE FILE OF THE ASSESSEE SEARCHED U/S 1 32 OF THE ACT AND THE DOCUMENTS CLAIMED TO BE OWNED BY THE ASSESSEE W ERE TRANSFERRED TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSEE. THE LD. CIT (APPEALS) HELD THAT THE JURISDICTION U/S 153C OF THE ACT WAS NOT ASSUMED IN PROPER MANNER. HE PROCEEDED TO QUASH THE ASSESSMENT ORDERS PASSED U/S 153C FOR BOTH THE YEARS. 2.2 NOW THE DEPARTMENT HAS APPROACHED THE ITAT AND HAS CHALLENGED THE ACTION OF THE LD. CIT (APPEALS) IN Q UASHING THE ASSESSMENTS. 3.0 THE LD. AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE PLACED RELIA NCE ON THE ORDERS OF THE LD. CIT (APPEALS) AND VEHEMENTLY ARGU ED THAT IT WAS APPARENT FROM THE PERUSAL OF THE SATISFACTION NOTE [REPRODUCED IN THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT (APPEALS)] THAT THE SATISFACTI ON WAS RECORDED BY THE AO IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE ITSELF AND NOT I N THE CASE OF THE 4 ITA N O. 993,994/DEL/2015 (ARINTEX LTD.) SEARCHED PERSON AND, THEREFORE, THE SATISFACTION NO TE DID NOT FULFILL THE MANDATE OF SECTION 153C OF THE ACT AND, ACCORDINGLY , THE LD. CIT (APPEALS) WAS JUSTIFIED IN QUASHING THE ASSESSMENTS FOR THE TWO YEARS UNDER CONSIDERATION. 4.0 IN RESPONSE, THE LD. CIT (DR) PLACED RELIANCE IN THE FINDINGS OBSERVATIONS OF THE AO AND ALSO PLACED REL IANCE ON THE FOLLOWING JUDGMENTS OF THE HONBLE DELHI HIGH COURT IN SUPPORT OF THE CONTENTION THAT IT WAS NOT NECESSARY THAT THE AO OF THE SEARCHED PARTY SHOULD RECORD THE SATISFACTION NOTE: (1) PCIT VS. INSTRONICS LTD., DELHI HIGH COURT, 20 17, [2017]82 TAXMANN.COM357 (DELHI) (2) GANPATI FINCAP SERVICES (P) LTD. VS. CIT, DELHI HIGH COURT, 2017, 82 TAXMANN.COM 408 (3) PCIT VS. SHEETAL INTERNATIONAL PVT. LTD., DELHI HIGH COURT, 20170TIO L01355-HC-DEL- IT. 4.1 THE LD. CIT-DR SUBMITTED THAT THE LD. CIT (AP PEALS) HAD QUASHED THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS WITHOUT APPRECIA TING THE FACTS OF THE CASE AND, THEREFORE, THE ORDERS OF THE LD. C IT (APPEALS) DESERVED TO BE SET ASIDE. 5.0 WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND HAVE A LSO PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. THE CONTE NTS OF THE SATISFACTION NOTE ARE REPRODUCED AS UNDER:- 5 ITA N O. 993,994/DEL/2015 (ARINTEX LTD.) OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-14 , ROOM NO. 320, 3 RD FLOOR, E-2 ARA CENTRE, JHANDEWALAN EXTN. NEW DELHI NAME & ADDRESS OF THE ASSESSEE : M/S. ARINTEX LTD. LOTUS TOWER, COMMUNITY CENTRE, BASEMENT NEW FRIENDS COLONY, NEW DELHI-110065 PAN : AADCA5442J PERIOD : ASSTT. YEARS 2005-06 TO 2010-11 DATE : 18.09.2012 SATISFACTION NOTE U/S. 153 C OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 THE CASE OF M/S. ARINTEX LTD. WAS CENTRALIZED U/S 12 7 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 WITH THE ASSESSING OFFICER, CENTRAL CIRCLE-14, NEW DELHI. VIDE ORDER F.NO. CIT-I/CENTRALISATION /2011-12/3422 DATED 26.03.2012 P ASSED BY CIT-I, NEW DELHI. SEARCH U/S 132 OF THE IT ACT, 1961 WAS CARRIED OUT AT THE PREMISES OF M/S. AMTEK AUTO LTD., 9 ALLIED HOUSE LSC MADANGIR, NEW D ELHI ON 22.03.2011. DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH PROCEEDING IN M/S. AMTE K GROUP OF CASES, CERTAIN DOCUMENTS BELONGING TO M/S. ARINTEX LTD. WERE FOUND AND SEIZED FROM THE ABOVE MENTIONED PREMISES IN WHOSE NAME SEARCH WARRA NT OF AUTHORIZATION HAS BEEN ISSUED. THE DOCUMENTS SEIZED FROM THE PREMISES OF AMTEK GRO UP AND BELONGING TO M/S. ARCHON ESTATES (P) LTD. ARE LISTED AS UNDER :- S. NO. PARTY NO. PREMISES ANNEXURE PAGE NO. DESCRIPTION 1. O2 - 3 M/S. AMTEK AUTO LTD.9 ALLIED HOUSE LSC MADANGIR, NEW DELHI AA - 1 1 - 5 1 ORIGINAL SHARE CERTIFICATES WITHOUT ADDRESS OF THE SHARE HOLDERS. 2. -- DO -- -- DO -- AA - 2 I - 86 BLANK SIGNED SHARE TRANSFER FORM. SHARE CAPITAL AND SHARE PREMIUM OF RS. 1.65 6 ITA N O. 993,994/DEL/2015 (ARINTEX LTD.) CRORES HAS BEEN RAISED BY THE COMPANY FROM 42 NON- EXISTENT SHAREHOLDERS DURING THE F.Y. 2006-07 AS PER APPRAISAL REPORT. FROM THE DETAIL GIVEN IN THE ABOVE DOCUMENTS, I AM SA TISFIED THAT THE PAGES MENTIONED IN THE ABOVE TABLE AND SEIZED FROM THE PR EMISES M/S. AMTEK AUTO LTD., 9 ALLIED HOUSE LSC MADANGIR, NEW DELHI BELONG S TO M/S. ARINTEX (P) LTD. THEREFORE IT IS A FIT CASE FOR ASSESSMENT U/S 153C OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. ACCORDINGY, NOTICE U/S 153C INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 AR E HEREBY ISSUED TO M/S. ARINTEX (P) LTD. FOR THE A.Y. 2005-06 TO 2010-11. 5.1 A PERUSAL OF THE ABOVE SATISFACTION NOTE MAKES IT APPARENT THAT THE SATISFACTION NOTE HAS BEEN RECORD ED IN THE FILE OF THE ASSESSEE INSTEAD OF THE FILE OF THE SEARCHED PA RTY. THIS CATEGORICAL FINDING HAS ALSO BEEN GIVEN BY THE LD. CIT (APPEALS) AND THE LD. CIT-DR COULD NOT DISPUTE THIS FINDING O F THE LD. CIT (APPEALS) THAT THIS SATISFACTION NOTE U/S. 153C WAS RECORDED IN THE FILE OF THE ASSESSEE AND NOT IN THE FILE OF THE SEA RCHED PARTY. ACCORDING TO SECTION 153C OF THE ACT, ACTION UNDER SECTION 153C CAN BE TAKEN IN RESPECT OF ANY OTHER PERSON THAN TH E PERSON SEARCHED, IF THE A.O. OF THE SEARCHED PERSON IS SAT ISFIED THAT ANY MONEY, BULLION, JEWELLERY, OR OTHER VALUABLE ARTICL E OR THING OR BOOKS OF ACCOUNT SEIZED OR REQUISITIONED BELONGS OR BELONGED TO A 7 ITA N O. 993,994/DEL/2015 (ARINTEX LTD.) PERSON OTHER THAN THE PERSON SEARCHED UNDER SECTION 153A. IN SUCH CIRCUMSTANCES, THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS REQUIR ED TO HAND OVER TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER OF SUCH OTHER PERSON MONEY , JEWELLERY, BULLION OR OTHER VALUABLE ARTICLE OR THING OR BOOKS OF ACCOUNT OR DOCUMENT, AND THEREAFTER, THE ASSESSING OFFICER OF SUCH OTHER PERSON IS TO PROCEED AGAINST THE SAID PERSON TO ASS ESS OR RE-ASSESS HIS INCOME IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF SEC TION 153A OF THE ACT. THEREFORE, RECORDING OF SATISFACTION BY TH E ASSESSING OFFICER OF THE PERSON SEARCHED IS A CONDITION PRECE DENT FOR INITIATING ACTION UNDER SECTION 153C OF THE I.T. AC T. THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF MANISH MAHESHWARI VS. ACIT REPORTED IN (2007) 289 ITR 341 (SC) IN PARA-11 HELD AS UNDER: 'CONDITION PRECEDENT FOR INVOKING A BLOCK ASSESSMEN T IS THAT A SEARCH HAS BEEN CONDUCTED UNDER SECTION 132, OR DOCUMENTS OR ASSETS HAVE BEEN REQUISITIONED UNDER SECTION 132A. THE SAID PROVISION WOULD APPLY IN THE CASE OF ANY PERSON IN RESPECT OF WHOM SEARCH HAS BEEN CA RRIED OUT UNDER SECTION 132A OR DOCUMENTS OR ASSETS HAVE BEEN REQUISITIONED UNDER SECTION 132A. SECTION 158BD, HOWEVER, PROVIDES FOR TAKING RECOURSE TO A BLOCK ASSESSMENT IN TERMS OF SECTION 158BC IN RESPECT OF ANY OTHER PERSON, THE CONDITIONS PRECEDENTS WHEREFOR AR E : (I) SATISFACTION MUST BE RECORDED BY THE ASSESSING OFFI CER THAT ANY UNDISCLOSED INCOME BELONGS TO ANY PERSON, OTHER THAN THE PERSON WITH RESPECT TO WHOM SEARCH WAS MAD E 8 ITA N O. 993,994/DEL/2015 (ARINTEX LTD.) UNDER SECTION 132 OF THE ACT; (II) THE BOOKS OF ACC OUNT OR OTHER DOCUMENTS OR ASSETS SEIZED OR REQUISITIONED H AD BEEN HANDED OVER TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAVING JURISDICTION OVER SUCH OTHER PERSON AND (III) THE A SSESSING OFFICER HAS PROCEEDED UNDER SECTION 158BC AGAINST S UCH OTHER PERSON. THE CONDITIONS PRECEDENT FOR INVOKING THE PROVISION S OF SECTION 158BD, THUS, ARE REQUIRED TO BE SATISFIED B EFORE THE PROVISIONS OF THE SAID CHAPTER ARE APPLIED IN R ELATION TO ANY PERSON OTHER THAN THE PERSON WHOSE PREMISES HAD BEEN SEARCHED OR WHOSE DOCUMENTS AND OTHER ASSETS H AD BEEN REQUISITIONED UNDER SECTION 132A OF THE ACT.' 5.2 IT WAS FURTHER HELD BY THE HONBLE SUPREME COUR T IN PARA-16 IN THE CASE OF MANISH MAHESHWARI (SUPRA) AS UNDER: 'LAW IN THIS REGARD IS CLEAR AND EXPLICIT. THE ONLY QUESTION WHICH ARISES FOR OUR CONSIDERATION IS AS TO WHETHER THE NOTICE DATED 06.02.1996 SATISFIES THE REQUIREMENTS OF SECTION 158BD OF THE ACT. THE SAID NOTICE DOES NOT RECORD ANY SATISFACTION ON THE PART OF THE ASSESSING OFFIC ER. DOCUMENTS AND OTHER ASSETS RECOVERED DURING SEARCH HAD NOT BEEN HANDED OVER TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAVIN G JURISDICTION IN THE MATTER.' 5.3 IT WAS FURTHER HELD IN PARA-22 BY THE HONBLE APEX COURT IN THE CASE OF MANISH MAHESHWARI (SUPRA) AS UNDER: 9 ITA N O. 993,994/DEL/2015 (ARINTEX LTD.) ' AS THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS NOT RECORDED HIS SATIS FACTION, WHICH IS MANDATORY; NOR HAS HE TRANSFERRED THE CASE TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAVING JURISDICTION OVER THE MATTER , WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENTS OF T HE HIGH COURT CANNOT BE SUSTAINED, WHICH ARE SET ASIDE ACCORDINGLY. THE APPEALS ARE ALLOWED. HOWEVER, IN T HE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THERE SHALL BE NO ORDER AS TO COSTS.' 5.4 THE CBDT VIDE CIRCULAR NO.24/2015 DATED 31 ST DECEMBER, 2015 ISSUED THE FOLLOWING DIRECTIONS: SUBJECT: RECORDING OF SATISFACTION NOTE UNDER SECTI ON 158BD/153C OF THE ACT REG. THE ISSUE OF RECORDING OF SATISFACTION FOR THE PURPOSES OF SECTION 158BD/153C HAS BEEN SUBJECT MAT TER OF LITIGATION. 2. THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF M/S CALCUTTA KNITWEARS IN ITS DETAILED JUDGMENT IN CIVI L APPEAL NO.3958 OF 2014 DATED 12.3.2014 (AVAILABLE IN NJRS AT 2014- LL-0312-51) HAS LAID DOWN THAT FOR THE PURPOS E OF SECTION 158BD OF THE ACT, RECORDING OF A SATISFACTI ON NOTE IS A PREREQUISITE AND THE SATISFACTION NOTE MUST BE PREPARED BY THE AO BEFORE HE TRANSMITS THE RECORD T O THE OTHER AO WHO HAS JURISDICTION OVER SUCH OTHER PERSO N U/S 158BD. THE HON'BLE COURT HELD THAT 'THE SATISFACTIO N NOTE COULD BE PREPARED AT ANY OF THE FOLLOWING STAGES : (A) AT THE TIME OF OR ALONG WITH THE INITIATION OF PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THE SEARCHED PERSON UNDER SECTI ON 10 ITA NO. 993,994/DEL/2015 (ARINTEX LTD.) 158BC OF THE ACT; OR (B) IN THE COURSE OF THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS UN DER SECTION 158BC OF THE ACT; OR (C) IMMEDIATELY AFTER THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS AR E COMPLETED UNDER SECTION 158BC OF THE ACT OF THE SEA RCHED PERSON.' 3. SEVERAL HIGH COURTS HAVE HELD THAT THE PROVISION S OF SECTION 153C OF THE ACT ARE SUBSTANTIALLY SIMILAR/P ARI- MATERIA TO THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 158BD OF THE A CT AND THEREFORE, THE ABOVE GUIDELINES OF THE HON'BLE SC, APPLY TO PROCEEDINGS U/ S 153C OF THE IT ACT, FOR THE PURPOS ES OF ASSESSMENT OF INCOME OF OTHER THAN THE SEARCHED PER SON. THIS VIEW HAS BEEN ACCEPTED BY CBDT. 4. THE GUIDELINES OF THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT AS R EFERRED TO IN PARA 2 ABOVE, WITH REGARD TO RECORDING OF SAT ISFACTION NOTE, MAY BE BROUGHT TO THE NOTICE OF ALL FOR STRIC T COMPLIANCE. IT IS FURTHER CLARIFIED THAT EVEN IF TH E AO OF THE SEARCHED PERSON AND THE 'OTHER PERSON' IS ONE AND T HE SAME, THEN ALSO HE IS REQUIRED TO RECORD HIS SATISF ACTION AS HAS BEEN HELD BY THE COURTS. 5. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, FILING OF APPEALS ON THE I SSUE OF RECORDING OF SATISFACTION NOTE SHOULD ALSO BE DECID ED IN THE LIGHT OF THE ABOVE JUDGEMENT. ACCORDINGLY, THE BOAR D HEREBY DIRECTS THAT PENDING LITIGATION WITH REGARD TO RECORDING OF SATISFACTION NOTE UNDER SECTION 158BD/ 153C SHOULD BE WITHDRAWN / NOT PRESSED IF IT DOES NOT ME ET THE GUIDELINES LAID DOWN BY THE APEX COURT. 11 ITA NO. 993,994/DEL/2015 (ARINTEX LTD.) 5.5 IT IS AN ADMITTED FACT THAT NO SATISFACTION NO TE U/S 153C WAS RECORDED BY THE AO OF THE SEARCHED PERSON. IT I S CLEAR FROM THE MATERIAL ON RECORD THAT THE SATISFACTION NOTE HAS N OT BEEN RECORDED BY THE AO IN THE CAPACITY OF THE AO OF THE SEARCHED PERSON AND, THEREFORE, THE PROCEEDINGS INITIATED U/S 153C OF TH E ACT AGAINST THE ASSESSEE WERE CLEARLY ILLEGAL, BAD IN LAW AND VOID AB INITIO . THEREFORE, THE LD. CIT (APPEALS) WAS CORRECT IN HOL DING THAT THE ASSUMPTION OF JURISDICTION U/S 153C OF THE ACT WAS ILLEGAL AND BAD IN LAW. ACCORDINGLY, WE FIND NO REASON TO INTERFERE WITH THE FINDINGS OF THE LD. CIT (APPEALS) AND WE DISMISS TH E APPEALS OF THE REVENUE. 6.0 IN THE FINAL RESULT, BOTH THE APPEALS OF THE R EVENUE STAND DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 30.11.2018 SD/- SD/- (R.K.PANDA) (SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 30.11.2018 *BR* COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(APPEALS) 5. DR: ITAT 12 ITA NO. 993,994/DEL/2015 (ARINTEX LTD.) TRUE COPY ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT NEW DELHI DATE OF DICTATION 28.11.2018 DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER 28.11.2018 DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE THE OTHER MEMBER 28.11.2018 DATE ON WHICH THE APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR. PS/PS 29.11.2018 DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER FOR PRONOUNCEMENT 30.11.2018 DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER COMES BACK TO THE SR. PS/PS 30.11.2018 DATE ON WHICH THE FINAL ORDER IS UPLOADED ON THE WEBSITE OF ITAT DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE BENCH CLERK DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK THE DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR FOR SIGNATURE ON THE ORDER DATE OF DISPATCH OF THE ORDER