The ACIT, Central Circle-2(4), Ahmedabad V. M/s. Sanghvi Fincap Ltd., Ahmedabad

ITSSA 417/AHD/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 122 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3166 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 5 month(s) 26 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax (Search & Seizure) Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 26-04-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Next Hearing Date: 24-04-2017
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 30-10-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: P M MEHTA
• Section: 153A; 132; 15

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL D BENCH, AHMEDABAD .., , BEFORE SHRI S.S. GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (SS) ./ I.T(SS).A. NO.417/AHD/2013 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007-08) THE ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4) AHMEDABAD / VS. M/S.SANGHVI FINCAP LTD. B-34, DHAVAL AVENUE, OFF.C.G.ROAD B/H. PANCHVATI PETROL PUMP LAW GARDEN, AHMEDABAD $ ./ ./ PAN/GIR NO. : AACCS 7458 K ( $' / APPELLANT ) .. ( ($' / RESPONDENT ) $') / APPELLANT BY : SHRI SANJAY AGARWAL, CIT-DR ($'*) / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI P.M. MEHTA, AR +,*- / DATE OF HEARING 24/04/2017 ./0*- / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 26/ 04/2017 / O R D E R PER PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, AM: THE PRESENT APPEAL BY THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS)-III, AHMEDA BAD [CIT(A) IN SHORT] DATED 29/08/2013 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR (AY) 2007-08. 2. THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL RAISED BY THE REVENUE RE AD AS UNDER:- IT(SS)A NO.417/ AHD/2013 ACIT VS. M/S.SANGHVI FINCAP LTD. ASST.YEAR 2007-08 - 2 - 1. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CA SE, THE LD.CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN DELETING THE ADDIT ION OF RS.81,60,350/- MADE U/S.41(1) OF THE IT ACT ON ACCO UNT OF CESSATION OF LIABILITY. 2. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE C ASE, THE LD.CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN DELETING THE ADDITION AS ABOVE IN GROUND (1) BY HOLDING THAT THE SAME ADDITI ON HAS BEEN CONSIDERED IN ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT U/S.143(3) OF THE IT ACT AND THE ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT HAD NOT ABATED, DESPITE THERE B EING NO PENDING ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS WHICH REQUIRED TO BE ABATED AND DESPITE ABATEMENT OF THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS NOT BEING A PRECONDITION FOR ASSESSING OR REASSESSING THE TOTAL INCOME U/S 153C R.W.S. 153A OF THE IT ACT. 3. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CA SE, THE LD.CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN DELETING THE ADDIT ION OF RS.14,490/- ON ACCOUNT OF UNACCOUNTED PURCHASE AND SALES. 3. BRIEFLY STATED, THE ASSESSEE IS A COMPANY. A SE ARCH WAS CONDUCTED UNDER S.132 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (HEREINAFTE R REFERRED TO AS 'THE ACT') IN THE CASE OF SANGHVI GROUP INCLUDING THE A SSESSEE ON 09/03/2011. AS A CONSEQUENCE, PROCEEDINGS UNDER S.153C R.W.S.15 3A OF THE ACT WERE INITIATED AGAINST THE ASSESSEE. PRIOR TO THE SEARCH , THE ASSESSEE HAD FILED THE RETURN OF INCOME FOR AY 2007-08 ON 07/11/2007 DECLARING A LOSSS OF RS.1,37,176/-. THE ORIGINAL RETURN (FILED PRIOR TO SEARCH) WAS ALSO SUBJECTED TO SCRUTINY ASSESSMENT UNDER S.143(3) OF THE ACT VIDE ORDER DATED 22/12/2009. IN THAT ASSESSMENT, DISPUTES REL ATING TO CESSATION OF LIABILITY UNDER S.41(1) OF THE ACT RS.81,60,350/- A S WELL AS TOWARDS IT(SS)A NO.417/ AHD/2013 ACIT VS. M/S.SANGHVI FINCAP LTD. ASST.YEAR 2007-08 - 3 - UNACCOUNTED PURCHASE AND SALES OF RS.14,727/- WERE RAISED. THE AFORESAID ORDER WAS SUBJECTED TO APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A) WHICH WAS DISPOSED OF BY THE CIT(A) VIDE ORDER DATED 05/10/20 10. THE ORDER OF CIT(A) WAS ALSO CARRIED TO THE ITAT BY THE REVENUE IN ITA NO.536/AHD/2011 AND ORDER ON THE GRIEVANCE OF THE R EVENUE WAS PASSED BY THE COORDINATE BENCH OF ITAT VIDE ORDER DATED 1 4/05/2015. THE ISSUES INVOLVED THUS ATTAINED FINALITY ON MERIT. 4. CONSEQUENT UPON SEARCH UNDER S.132 IN GROUP CASE S, PROCEEDINGS UNDER S.153C R.W.S. S.153A WERE ALSO INITIATED FOR VARIOUS ASSESSMENT YEARS INCLUDING THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT YEAR IN RES PECT OF ASSESSEE HEREIN. IDENTICAL ISSUES RAISED IN THE ORIGINAL A SSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS WERE ONCE AGAIN REPEATED BY THE AO IN THEASSESSMENT PROCEEDING PURSUANT TO SEARCH. THE CIT(A) REVERSED THE ORDER OF THE AO. 5. THE REVENUE IS IN APPEAL AGAINST THE ORDER OF CI T(A). 6. IN THE REVENUES APPEAL, THE LD.AR FOR THE ASSES SEE, AT THE OUTSET, SUBMITTED THAT THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER ( AO) FRAMED UNDER S.153C R.W.S.153A IN PURSUANCE OF THE SEARCH MERELY SEEKS TO RESTATE AND REASSESS THE ISSUES EARLIER RAISED IN THE ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT NAMELY; TOWARDS CESSATION OF LIABILITY UNDER S.41(1) OF THE ACT AND UNACCOUNTED PURCHASE AND SALES WHICH WERE ALREADY ASSESSED EARL IER IN THE ORIGINAL IT(SS)A NO.417/ AHD/2013 ACIT VS. M/S.SANGHVI FINCAP LTD. ASST.YEAR 2007-08 - 4 - PROCEEDINGS PRIOR TO SEARCH. THE LD.AR SUBMITTED THAT JURISDICTION TO REASSESS THE COMPLETED ASSESSMENT UNDER S.153A IS N ARROW AND LIMITED TO SEARCH RELATED MATERIAL AND EVENTS. NO ADDITIONS HA VE BEEN MADE IN THE INSTANT CASE WITH REFERENCE TO ANY INCRIMINATING MA TERIAL FOUND IN THE COURSE OF SEARCH PER SE . THE ASSESSMENT FOR THE IMPUGNED AY 2007-08 ALSO STANDS COMPLETED AND NOT PENDING AT THE TIME OF SEARCH. THE LD.AR THEREFORE CONTENDED THAT NOTWITHSTANDING ABSENCE OF ANY INCRIMINATING MATERIAL, THE COMPLETED ASSESSMENT HAS BEEN SOUGHT TO BE ABATED. THE ACTION OF AO WAS THUS ALLEGED TO BE OPPOSED TO LAW. IT WAS, THUS ASSERTED THAT THE ISSUES ALREADY ASSESSED ARE SOUGHT TO BE R EASSESSED UNDER S.153C/153A REGARDLESS OF THE FACT THAT NO INCRIMIN ATING MATERIAL HAS BEEN FOUND. THE LD.AR CONTENDED THAT IN VIEW OF SE VERAL DECISIONS HOLDING THE FIELD, THE AO IS NOT ENTITLED TO REVIS IT THE ASSESSED INCOME IN THE COURSE OF 153A PROCEEDINGS WITHOUT SHOWING NEXU S TO SOME INCRIMINATING MATERIAL. NO MATERIAL HAS BEEN FOUND WHICH WOULD IMPLICATE THE ASSESSEE TOWARDS ANY UNDISCLOSED INCO ME IN ANY MANNER. IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES, IT WAS CONTENDED THAT THE CAS E OF THE ASSESSEE IS CLEARLY COVERED BY THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE GUJA RAT HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF PR.CIT VS. SAUMYA CONSTRUCTION PVT.LTD. RE PORTED IN 387 ITR 529 (GUJ.) AND HOST OF OTHER DECISIONS. THE LD.AR A CCORDINGLY CONTENDED THAT ADDITIONS/DISALLOWANCES MADE UNDER S.153 R.W. S.153A ARE BAD IN LAW AND CONSEQUENTLY THE CIT(A) HAS RIGHTLY GRANTED RELIEF TO THE IT(SS)A NO.417/ AHD/2013 ACIT VS. M/S.SANGHVI FINCAP LTD. ASST.YEAR 2007-08 - 5 - ASSESSEE. HE ACCORDINGLY PLEADED THAT NO INTERFERE NCE WITH THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) IS CALLED FOR. 7. THE LD.DR, ON THE OTHER HAND, SUPPORTING THE APP EAL OF THE REVENUE SUBMITTED THAT THE ADDITIONS/DISALLOWANCES UNDER S.153A NEED NOT BE RESTRICTED OR LIMITED TO THE INCRIMINATING M ATERIAL FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH. THE LD.DR RELIED UPON THE DECISI ON OF THE HONBLE KERALA HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF E.N. GOPAKUMAR VS. CIT (CENTRAL) 390 ITR 131 (KER.) FOR THE PROPOSITION THAT THE PROVISI ONS OF SECTION 153A NOWHERE MAKES IT CONDITIONAL THAT DEPARTMENT HAS TO UNEARTH SOME INCRIMINATING MATERIAL TO CONCLUDE AGAINST THE INTE REST OF THE ASSESSEE IN ASSESSMENT PURSUANT TO SEARCH. IT WAS SUBMITTED TH AT ONCE THE PROCEEDINGS ARE INITIATED UNDER S.153C R.W.S.153A, THE LEGAL EFFECT IS THAT EVEN IN CASE WHERE THE ASSESSMENT ORDER IS PASSED, IT STANDS REOPENED AND THE AO IS ENTITLED TO REDO THE ASSESSMENT OF INCOME ALREADY DISCLOSED PRIOR TO SEARCH, INCOME UNEARTHED AND ANY OTHER INC OME. HE ACCORDINGLY CONCLUDED THAT THE REVENUE IS NOT HAMSTRUNG BY THE PRESENCE OR OTHERWISE OF ANY INCRIMINATING MATERIAL. THE LD.DR , ACCORDINGLY, ASSERTED WITH VEHEMENCE THAT THE ORDER OF CIT(A) CA NNOT BE SUSTAINED IN LAW. 8. WE HAVE CAREFULLY CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIO NS. THE SUBSTANTIVE ISSUE THAT ARISES FOR CONSIDERATION IN THE PRESENT APPEAL IS IT(SS)A NO.417/ AHD/2013 ACIT VS. M/S.SANGHVI FINCAP LTD. ASST.YEAR 2007-08 - 6 - WHETHER THE PROCEEDINGS UNDERTAKEN AS TERMS OF S.1 53C/S.153A, SHOULD NECESSARILY BE BASED ON INCRIMINATING MATERIAL FOUN D IN THE COURSE OF SEARCH, WHERE THE REGULAR ASSESSMENT ALREADY STANDS COMPLETED. IN THE INSTANT CASE, THE ASSESSMENT WAS FRAMED IN FURTHER ANCE OF SEARCH AS CONTEMPLATED UNDER S.153C R.W.S.153A OF THE ACT. T HE ASSESSMENT SO MADE SEEKS TO ENCOMPASS REGULAR ITEMS OF ADDITIONS/ DISALLOWANCES INDEPENDENT OF INCRIMINATING MATERIAL. IT IS ALS O ADMITTED POSITION IN THE INSTANT CASE THAT THE ASSESSMENT WAS COMPLETED PRIO R TO SEARCH AND THUS DO NOT STAND ABATED IN TERMS OF SECOND PROVISO TO S UB-SECTION (1) OF S.153A. 9. WE NOTE THAT THE LAW HAS BEEN CLEARLY LAID DOW N ON THE ISSUE BY THE HONBLE GUJARAT HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF SAUMYA CO NSTRUCTION(SUPRA) REFERRED TO AND RELIED UPON BY THE ASSESSEE. THE HO NBLE GUJARAT HIGH COURT AFTER MAKING REFERENCE TO THE HOSTS OF THE DE CISIONS RENDERED IN THIS REGARD BY VARIOUS HIGH COURTS AND AFTER MAKING REFE RENCE TO THE PROVISIONS OF THE STATUTE EXPLAINED THE MANDATE OF LAW IN THIS REGARD. HONBLE HIGH COURT HELD THAT IN EXERCISE OF POWERS OUTLINED UNDER S.153A OF THE ACT TOWARDS COMPLETED ASSESSMENTS, A DDITION OR DISALLOWANCES IN SECTION 153A PROCEEDINGS OUGHT TO BE MADE WITH REFERENCE TO INCRIMINATING MATERIAL FOUND IN THE CO URSE OF SEARCH. THE RELEVANT PARA OF THE JUDGEMENT IS EXTRACTED FOR REA DY REFERENCE HEREUNDER:- IT(SS)A NO.417/ AHD/2013 ACIT VS. M/S.SANGHVI FINCAP LTD. ASST.YEAR 2007-08 - 7 - 18. IN THIS CASE, IT IS NOT THE CASE OF THE APPELL ANT THAT ANY INCRIMINATING MATERIAL IN RESPECT OF THE ASSESSMENT YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION WAS FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH . AT THE RELEVANT TIME WHEN THE NOTICE CAME TO BE ISSUED UND ER SECTION 153A OF THE ACT, THE ASSESSEE FILED ITS RETURN OF I NCOME. MUCH LATER, AT THE FAG END OF THE PERIOD WITHIN WHICH TH E ORDER UNDER SECTION 153A OF THE ACT WAS TO BE MADE, IN OTHER WO RDS, WHEN THE LIMIT FOR FRAMING THE ASSESSMENT AS PROVIDED UNDER SECTION 153 WAS ABOUT TO EXPIRE THE NOTICE HAS BEEN ISSUED IN T HE PRESENT CASE SEEKING TO MAKE THE PROPOSED ADDITION OF RS.11,05,5 1,000/- ON THE BASIS OF THE MATERIAL WHICH WAS NOT FOUND DURING TH E COURSE OF SEARCH, BUT ON THE BASIS OF A STATEMENT OF ANOTHER PERSON IN THE OPINION OF THIS COURT, IN A CASE LIKE THE PRESENT O NE, WHERE AN ASSESSMENT HAS BEEN FRAMED EARLIER AND NO ASSESSMEN T OR REASSESSMENT WAS PENDING ON THE DATE OF INITIATION OF SEARCH UNDER SECTION 132 OR MAKING OF REQUISITION UNDER SECTION 132A, WHILE COMPUTING THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE UNDER SE CTION 153A OF THE ACT, ADDITIONS OR DISALLWOANCES CAN BE MADE ONL Y ON THE BASIS OF THE INCRIMINATING MATERIAL FOUND DURING THE SEAR CH OR REQUISITION IN THE PRESENT CASE, IT IS AN ADMITTED POSITION THAT NO INCRIMINATING MATERIAL WAS FOUND DURING THE COURE O F SEARCH, HOWEVER, IT IS ON THE BASIS OF SOME MATERIL COLLECT ED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER MUCH SUBSEQUENT TO THE SEARCH, TH AT THE IMPUGNED ADDITIONS CAME TO BE MADE. 19. ON BEHALF OF THE APPELLANT, IT HAS BEEN CONTEND ED THAT IF ANY INCRIMINATING MATERIAL IS FOUND, NOTWITHSTANDING TH AT IN RELATION TO THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION, NO INCRIMINATING MATE RIAL IS FOUND, IT WOULD BE PERMISSIBLE TO MAKE ADDITIONS AND DISALLOW ANCE IN RESPECT OF ALL THE SIX ASSESSMENT YEARS. IN THE OP INION OF THIS COURT, THE SAID CONTENTION DOES NOT MERIT ACCEPTANCE, INAS MUCH AS, THE ASSESSMENT IN RESPECT OF EACH OF THE SIX ASSESSMENT YEARS IS A SEPARATE AND DISTINCT ASSESSMENT. UNDER SECTION 15 3A OF THE ACT, AN ASSESSMENT HAS TO BE MADE IN RELATION TO THE SEA RCH OR IT(SS)A NO.417/ AHD/2013 ACIT VS. M/S.SANGHVI FINCAP LTD. ASST.YEAR 2007-08 - 8 - REQUISITION, NAMELY, IN RELATION TO MATERIAL DISCLO SED DURING THE SEARCH OR REQUISITION. IF IN RELATION TO ANY ASSES SMENT YEAR, NO INCRIMINATING MATERIAL IF FOUND, NO ADDITION OR DIS ALLOWANCE CAN BE MADE IN RELATION TO THAT ASSESSMENT YEAR IN EXER CISE OF POWERS UNDER SECTION 153A OF THE ACT AND THE EARLIER ASSES SMENT SHALL HAVE TO BE REITERATED. IN THIS REGARD, THIS COURT IS IN COMPLETE AGREEMENT WITH THE VIEW ADOPTED BY THE RAJASTHAN HI GH COURT IN THE CASE OF JAI STEEL (INDIA), JODHPUR V. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (SUPRA). BESIDES, AS RIGHTLY POINTED OU T BY THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT THE CONTROVERSY INVOLVED IN THE PRESENT CASE STANDS CONCLUDED BY THE DECISION OF THIS COURT IN THE CASE OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX-1, V. JAYABEN RATILAL SO RATHIA (SUPRA) WHEREIN IT HAS BEEN HELD THAT WHILE IT CANN OT BE DISPUTED THAT CONSIDERING SECTION 153A OF THE ACT, THE ASSES SING OFFICER CAN REOPEN AND/O9R ASSESS THE RETURN WITH RESPECT TO SI X PRECEDING YEARS; HOWEVER, THERE MUST BE SOME INCRIMINATING MA TERIAL AVAILABLE WITH THE ASSESSING OFFICER WITH RESPECT T O THE SALE TRANSACTIONS IN THE PARTICULAR ASSESSMENT YEAR. 10. ON FACTS, IT IS ADMITTED POSITION THAT NO INC RIMINATING MATERIAL HAS BEEN FOUND WITH REFERENCE TO ADDITIONS/DISALLOWANCE S WHICH ARE SUBJECT MATTER OF PRESENT APPEAL. ON THE CONTRARY, THE IDEN TICAL ADDITIONS/DISALLOWANCES WERE CARRIED OUT IN THE ORI GINAL PROCEEDINGS PRIOR TO SEARCH AND WERE ALSO SUBJECT MATTER OF REVIEW B EFORE THE APPELLATE AUTHORITIES. THUS, THE ACTION OF THE REVENUE IS D IRECTLY AT ODDS WITH THE JUDICIAL DICTUM. THE RELIANCE WAS PLACED ON THE DEC ISION OF HONBLE KERALA HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF E.N. GOPAKUMAR (SU PRA) ON BEHALF OF THE REVENUE FOR THE PROPOSITION THAT THE AO IS CONT INUED TO RETAIN ORIGINAL JURISDICTION AS WELL AS JURISDICTION CONFE RRED ON HIM UNDER IT(SS)A NO.417/ AHD/2013 ACIT VS. M/S.SANGHVI FINCAP LTD. ASST.YEAR 2007-08 - 9 - S.153C R.W.S.153A IN THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS PUR SUANT TO SEARCH. WE ARE NOT PERSUADED BY THE AFORESAID PLEA OF REVENUE IN THE LIGHT OF THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT G OVERNING THE IDENTICAL ISSUE WHICH SEEKS LIMIT THE SCOPE OF ASSESSMENT UN DER S.153C/153A. IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT VARIOUS ADDITIONS/ DISALLOWANCES MADE BY THE AO IN ASSESSMENT UNDER S. 153A ACT ARE CLEARLY BEYOND THE SCOPE OF AUTHORITY VESTED UNDER STATUTE OWING TO ABSENCE OF ANY INCRIMINATING MATERIAL OR EVIDENCE D ETECTED AS A RESULT OF SEARCH. PERTINENT TO NOTE THAT NO REFERENCE TO ANY INCRIMINATING MATERIAL IS FOUND IN THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW FOR THE PURPOSE OF MAKING IMPUGNED ADDITIONS OR DISALLOWANCES UNDER CHALLENGE . ACCORDINGLY, WE FIND NO REASON TO INTERFERE WITH THE ORDER OF THE C IT(A). WE HOLD THAT ADDITIONS/DISALLOWANCES MADE BY THE AO ARE NOT SUST AINABLE IN LAW. 11. IN THE RESULT, REVENUES APPEAL STANDS DISMISSE D. THIS ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 26 / 04/2017 SD/- SD/- (..) ( ) ( S.S. GODARA ) ( PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AHMEDABAD; DATED 26/ 04 /2017 4..+,.+../ T.C. NAIR, SR. PS IT(SS)A NO.417/ AHD/2013 ACIT VS. M/S.SANGHVI FINCAP LTD. ASST.YEAR 2007-08 - 10 - !'#$%$' / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. $' / THE APPELLANT 2. ($' / THE RESPONDENT. 3. 567- 8- / CONCERNED CIT 4. 8- ( ) / THE CIT(A)-III, AHMEDABAD 5. 9:-+67 , 670 , 5 / DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. <, / GUARD FILE. / BY ORDER, (9-- //TRUE COPY// / ( DY./ASSTT.REGISTRAR) , / ITAT, AHMEDABAD 1. DATE OF DICTATION .. 24.4.17 (DICTATION-PAD 13- PAGES ATTACHED AT THE END OF THIS APPEAL-FILE) 2. DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER 24.4.17 3. OTHER MEMBER 4. DATE ON WHICH THE APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.P. S./P.S.. 5. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER IS PLACED BEFORE THE D ICTATING MEMBER FOR PRONOUNCEMENT 6. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER COMES BACK TO THE SR.P .S./P.S.26.4.17 7. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE BENCH CLERK 26.4.17 8. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK ... 9. THE DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE ASSISTANT RE GISTRAR FOR SIGNATURE ON THE ORDER.. 10. DATE OF DESPATCH OF THE ORDER