The Bank of Tokyo Mistubishi UFJ Ltd., New Delhi v. DCIT (International Taxation), New Delhi

ITA 4584/DEL/2016 | 2007-2008
Pronouncement Date: 16-09-2019 | Result: Allowed
Expert Summary: Charging of interest u/s. 234D is not justified when refund due to assessee has been adjusted to the outstanding demand.

Appeal Details

RSA Number 458420114 RSA 2016
Assessee PAN AABCT3880D
Bench Delhi
Appeal Number ITA 4584/DEL/2016
Duration Of Justice 3 year(s) 17 day(s)
Appellant The Bank of Tokyo Mistubishi UFJ Ltd., New Delhi
Respondent DCIT (International Taxation), New Delhi
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 16-09-2019
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Tags No record found
Order Result Allowed
Bench Allotted A
Tribunal Order Date 16-09-2019
Assessment Year 2007-2008
Appeal Filed On 29-08-2016
Judgment Text
1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI A BEN CH NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI AMIT SHUKLA JUDICIAL MEMB ER ITA NO. 4584/DEL/2016 [A.Y 2007-08] THE BANK OF TOKYO-MITSUBISHI VS DY. C.I.T UFJ LTD. 5TH FLOOR WORLDMARK-2 CIRCLE-3(1 )(1) INTERNATIONAL ASSET 8 AEROCITY NH-8 TAXATION NEW DELHI NEW DELHI-110037 PAN NO. AABCT3880 D (APPELLANT) (RESPOND ENT) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI PERCY PA RDIWALA DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI G.K. DHALL CIT- DR [INTLL. TAX] DATE OF HEARING : 12.09.2019 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 16.09.2019 ORDER PER N.K. BILLAIYA ACCOUNTANT MEMBER THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS PREFERRED AGAINST TH E ORDER DATED 28.07.2016 FRAMED U/S 143(3) R.W.S 144C OF THE INCO ME-TAX ACT 1961 [HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS 'THE ACT'] PERTAINING T O ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10. 2 2. GROUND NO. 1 IS GENERAL IN NATURE AND NEEDS NO S EPARATE ADJUDICATION. 3. VIDE GROUND NO. 2 THE ASSESSEE HAS CHALLENGED T HE ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF INTEREST RECEIVED ON EXTERNAL COMMERCIAL BORROWINGS [ECB] EXTENDED TO INDIAN BORROWERS. 4. AT THE VERY OUTSET THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSE SSEE STATED THAT ON IDENTICAL SET OF FACTS THIS ISSUE WAS CONSIDERED B Y THE TRIBUNAL IN ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12 IN ITA NO. 306/DEL/2016 VID E GROUND NO. 2 OF THAT APPEAL AND VIDE ADJUDICATING THE ISSUE IN FAVO UR OF THE ASSESSEE THE TRIBUNAL RELIED ON THE DECISION OF THE CO-ORDIN ATE BENCH FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11 IN ITA NO. 1174/DEL/2015. 5. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE FURTHER POINTED OUT THAT THIS ISSUE CAME UP FOR ADJUDICATION AGAIN IN ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013-14 AND AGAIN THE TRIBUNAL IN ITA NO. 7212/DEL/2017 HAS DEC IDED IT IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE AND AGAINST THE REVENUE. THE LD. COUN SEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUPPLIED COPIES OF THE ORDERS OF THE CO-ORDINATE BE NCH. 3 6. PER CONTRA THE LD. DR STATED THAT THIS ISSUE WA S ALSO CONSIDERED BY THE TRIBUNAL IN ITA NO. 4548/DEL/2016 FOR ASSESS MENT YEAR 2008-09 AND HAS DECIDED THE ISSUE AGAINST THE ASSESSEE AND IN FAVOUR OF THE REVENUE. 7. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE STATED THAT DUE TO TYPOGRAPHICAL ERROR IT HAS BEEN MENTIONED AS IN FAVOUR OF THE D EPARTMENT AND AGAINST THE ASSESSEE AND A MISC APPLICATION HAS AL READY BEEN FILED FOR RECTIFICATION OF THE MISTAKE. THE LD. DR FURTHER S TATED THAT SINCE THE ISSUE WAS DECIDED AGAINST THE REVENUE THE REVENUE PREFERRED APPEAL BEFORE THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF DELHI WHICH APPEA L HAS BEEN ADMITTED. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE FURNISH ED COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT BEARING ITA NO. 1066/2017 AND 1072/2017. 7. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND HAVE CAR EFULLY PERUSED THE ORDERS OF THE CO-ORDINATE BENCHES AS MENTIONED HEREINABOVE. WE FIND FORCE IN THE CONTENTION OF THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE. THE ISSUE STANDS COVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE AND AGAINST THE REVENUE VIDE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL IN ITA NO. 1174/DEL/2015 . THE RELEVANT FINDINGS OF THE TRIBUNAL READ AS UNDER: 4 GROUND NO. 7 : IT IS REGARDING ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF INTEREST RECEIVED FROM EXTERNAL COMMERCIAL BORROWINGS (ECB) GIVEN TO INDIAN BORROWERS. 21. THE FACTS IN BRIEF ARE THAT THE HEAD OFFICE / O THER OVERSEAS BRANCHES OF THE ASSESSEE ARE IN RECEIPT OF INTEREST EARNED FROM THE EXTERNAL COMMERCIAL BORROWINGS (ECB ) GIVEN TO THE INDIAN BORROWERS PARTIES. INDIAN BRANCHES OF ASSESSEE HELP ITS INDIAN CUSTOMERS IN ARRANGING FUNDS THROUG H ITS OVERSEAS BRANCHES AND THE DEALER IN INDIA CANNOT LE ND IN FOREIGN CURRENCY EXCEPT FOR PROVIDING EXPORT CREDIT TO ITS CONCERN AS PER THE EXTANT RESERVE BANK OF INDIA REG ULATIONS. INDIAN BRANCHES OF THE ASSESSEE BUT ON THE REQUEST OF THE CUSTOMERS PASS ON THE LEAD TO THE OVERSEAS BRANCHES ALONG WITH THE CREDIT EVALUATION REPORT TERMS AND CONDIT IONS OF APPROVAL AND DETAILS OF SECURITY DOCUMENTS TO BE EN TERED INTO. INDIAN BRANCHES EVALUATE THE CUSTOMER ON AN ON-GOIN G BASIS AND PASSES ON THE LEAD INFORMATION TO ITS OVERSEAS BRANCHES ON ACTIVITIES RELATED TO CREDIT RATING MONITORING OF COVENANTS ETC. ON RECEIPT OF THE INFORMATION FROM THE INDIAN BRANCHES OF THE ASSESSEE THE OVERSEAS BRANCHES OF THE BANK DO THE BOOKING OF THE LOAN BASED ON THE TERMS AND CONDITIO NS OF THE APPROVAL. THE AGREEMENT AND SECURITY DOCUMENTATIONS ARE ENTERED BETWEEN OVERSEAS BRANCHES AND THE BORROWERS . INDIAN BRANCHES RECEIVE SYNDICATION FEES FROM ITS H EAD OFFICE 5 / OTHER OVERSEAS BRANCHES FOR THE SERVICES RENDERED BY IT IN RELATION TO ECB. 22.THE CASE OF AUTHORITIES BELOW IS THAT INTEREST I NCOME ACCRUES AND ARISES AS UNDER: (I) INTEREST INCOME ACCRUES AND ARISES HR INDIA UND ER SECTION 9(L)(V) OF THE ACT. SINCE THE ECB DO NOT FO RM PART OF THE ASSET BASE OF THE PE IN INDIA AND IS NOT EFFECT IVELY CONNECTED WITH THE PE ECB INTEREST IS CHARGEABLE T O TAX UNDER ARTICLE 11 OF THE TREATY BETWEEN INDIA AND JA PAN (PARA 9.2 AND 9.3 AT PAGE NOS. 207-208 OF APPEAL SET). (II) NO TAX CREDIT HOWEVER IS ALLOWABLE TO THE AS SESSEE SINCE ANY NEW CLAIM CAN BE MADE BY THE ASSESSEE ON LY THROUGH A REVISED RETURN OF INCOME (PARA 9.7 AT PAGE 210 OF APPEAL SET) (III) SINCE INTEREST IS PAYABLE ON A NET OF TAX BAS IS I.E. TAX HAS BEEN BORNE BY THE BORROWERS THE ECB INTEREST I S GROSSED UP FOR ARRIVING AT THE INCOME TO BE INCLUDED IN THE COMPUTATION OF TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE (PARA 9.8 AT PAGE 210 OF APPEAL SET). 23. IN SUPPORT OF THE GROUND THE ID. AR MADE FOLL OWING SUBMISSIONS :- 6 (I) AT THE OUTSET WE WISH TO SUBMIT THAT DUE TO L ACK OF THE DETAILS/INFORMATION THE TRIBUNAL IN THE ORDER PASS ED FOR ASSESSMENT YEARS 2007-08 AND 2008-09 HAD REMANDED B ACK THE ISSUE OF TAXABILITY OF ECB INTEREST TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR DE NOVO CONSIDERATION. HOWEV ER AS NOTED BY THE DRP SINCE ALL THE REQUISITE DETAILS H AVE BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR AY 2010-11 AND THE ISSUE HAS BEEN DECIDED ACCORDINGLY IT IS SUBMITTED THAT THE MATTE R IS NOT REQUIRED TO BE RESTORED BACK TO THE ASSESSING OFFIC ER FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11 AND THE SAME BE DECIDED BY THE TRIBUNAL ON MERITS. (II) ECBS GIVEN TO THE INDIAN CUSTOMERS ARE EFFECTI VELY CONNECTED WITH THE INDIAN PE OF THE ASSESSEE AND AN AMOUNT I.E. SYNDICATION FEE WHICH IS COMMENSURATE WITH TH E ROLE PLAYED BY THE INDIAN PE AND IS ATTRIBUTABLE TO THE INDIAN PE HAS ALREADY BEEN OFFERED TO TAX BY THE ASSESSEE I N THE COMPUTATION OF ITS INCOME TAXABLE IN INDIA AS PER T HE PROVISIONS OF ARTICLE 7 OF THE INDO-JAPANESE TREATY ; AND THEREFORE IN VIEW OF ARTICLE 11(6) READ WITH ARTIC LE 7 OF INDO-JAPANESE TREATY NOTHING FURTHER CAN BE BROUGH T TO TAX IN INDIA. 7 (III) DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION THE INDI AN PE/BRANCHES OF THE ASSESSEE RECEIVED AN AMOUNT OF R S 14 58 92 297 AS SYNDICATION FEE FROM ITS HO/OTHER O VERSEAS BRANCHES FOR THE SERVICES PERFORMED BY THE INDIAN B RANCHES IN RELATION TO ECBS WHICH HAS BEEN CREDITED TO PRO FIT & LOSS ACCOUNT OF THE INDIAN BRANCHES OF THE ASSESSEE AND OFFERED TO TAX IN THE RETURN OF INCOME FILED BY THE ASSESSE E. APART FROM THIS THE ASSESSEE HAS OFFERED TO TAX AN AMOUN T OF RS 2 14 77 903 AS TRANSFER PRICING ADJUSTMENT WITH RES PECT TO ECB SYNDICATION FEE IN THE RETURN OF INCOME. THEREF ORE THE ASSESSEE HAS ALREADY OFFERED TO TAX AN AMOUNT OF RS 16 73 70 200 (RS.14 58 92 297 + RS 2 14 77 903) AS FEE RECEIVED BY THE INDIAN PE OF THE ASSESSEE FROM ITS HO/OTHER OVERSEAS BRANCHES FOR THE SERVICES PERFORMED IN REL ATION TO ECBS WHICH HAS BEEN ACCEPTED TO BE AN ARMS LENGTH PRICE BY THE REVENUE. (IV) THE MUMBAI TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF CREDIT LYON NAIS (ITA NO. 1935/MUM/2007) HAS HELD THAT ECB INTEREST IS NOT ATTRIBUTABLE TO THE INDIAN BRANCHES OF THE ASSESSEE AND ONLY THE FEE IS TAXABLE IN THE HANDS OF THE INDIAN BRANC HES OF THE ASSESSEE FOR THE ROLE PLAYED BY IT IN ARRANGING THE ECBS. (V) WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO THE CLAIM OF NON-TAXABILIT Y OF ECB INTEREST INCOME THE AO HAS ERRED IN NOT ALLOWING T HE CREDIT FOR TAX DEDUCTED AT SOURCE ON ECB INTEREST. SAMPLE COPIES OF 8 TDS CERTIFICATES WERE ALSO FURNISHED TO THE AO. FUR THER THAT THE TAXES HAVE BEEN DEDUCTED IS AN ADMITTED PO SITION SINCE THE AO HAS HIMSELF GROSSED UP THE ENTIRE AMOU NT OF ECB INTEREST BY THE AMOUNT OF TAX BORNE BY THE BORROWER S. ONCE THIS IS SO IN VIEW OF SECTION 208 OF THE ACT THE NECESSARY CREDIT HAS TO BE GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE. I) TAX AT SOURCE HAS BEEN DEDUCTED FROM THE SAMPLE COPIES OF TDS CERTIFICATES FURNISHED BEFORE THE ASS ESSING OFFICER AND HE HAS ADMITTED THE SAME BY GROSSING UP THE ECB INTEREST BY THE AMOUNT OF TAX BORNE BY THE BORROWER S THEREFORE NO INTEREST UNDER SECTION 234B OF THE AC T CAN BE LEVIED FOR THE TAX DEMAND ON ACCOUNT OF ECB INTERES T. (VII) EVEN ON MERITS INTEREST UNDER SECTION 234B O F THE ACT IS NOT APPLICABLE SINCE ECB INTEREST RECEIVED BY THE A SSESSEE FROM THE BORROWERS IS SUBJECT TO TAX DEDUCTION AT S OURCE UNDER SECTION 195 OF THE ACT. RELIANCE IS PLACED ON THE JUDGMENT OF THE DELHI HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF GE PACKAGED POWER INC. [2015] 373 ITR 65 WHEREIN IT HAS BEEN HE LD BY THE DELHI HIGH COURT THAT NO INTEREST UNDER SECTION 234 B OF THE ACT CAN BE LEVIED WHERE THE PAYMENT TO NON-RESIDENT PAYEE IS SUBJECT TO TAX DEDUCTION AT SOURCE. 9 24. THE ID. CIT [DR] ON THE OTHER HAND CONTENDED THAT ECB INTEREST HAS BEEN EARNED BY THE HO/OTHER OVERSE AS BRANCHES OF THE ASSESSEE FROM THIRD PARTY. SUCH ECB IS NOT THE DEBT CLAIM OF THE INDIAN BRANCHES OF THE ASSESS EE AND THEREFORE ECB INTEREST IS NOT EFFECTIVELY CONNECTE D WITH THE INDIAN BRANCHES. IF TAX IS BORNE BY THE BORROWERS CREDIT FOR TDS ON ECB INTEREST IS NOT ALLOWABLE TO THE ASSESSEE. IF DIRECTION IS ISSUED FOR ALLOWABILITY OF TDS CRED IT THE SAME SHOULD BE GRANTED TO THE ASSESSEE SUBJECT TO VERIFI CATION OF THE SAME FROM THE DEDUCTORS/BORROWERS. 25. THE ID. AR REJOINED WITH THE SUBMISSION THAT WHEN THE TAX IS BORN BY THE PAYER OF THE INCOME INCOME IS G ROSSED UP BY THE AMOUNT OF TAX BORN BY THE PAYER AND SUCH GROSSED UP INTEREST IS TAXED IN THE HANDS OF THE PA YEE. ANY TAXES WITH-HELD BY THE PAYER IS ALLOWABLE AS CREDIT TO THE PAYEE OF INCOME AGAINST THE INCOME TAXED IN THE HAN DS OF THE PAYEE. HE SUBMITTED THAT CBDT VIDE ITS CIRCULAR NO. 785 DATED 24.11.1999 HAS ALSO CLARIFIED THAT WHERE THE PAYMENT IS MADE OF TAXES I.E. TAX IS BORNE BY THE P AYER OF THE INCOME THE PAYER IS UNDER OBLIGATION TO ISSUE TDS CERTIFICATE TO THE PAYEE SINCE SUCH GROSSED UP INC OME IS TAXABLE IN THE HANDS OF THE PAYEE AND THE PAYEE IS ELIGIBLE 10 TO CLAIM CREDIT OF SUCH TAXES WITH HELD AGAINST THE INCOME TAXED IN THE HANDS OF THE PAYEE. 26. AFTER HAVING GONE THROUGH THE ABOVE CITED DECISION WE FIND THAT MUMBAI BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF CREDIT LYONNAIS (SUPRA) HAS HELD THAT ECB INTEREST IS NOT ATTRIBUTABLE TO THE INDIAN BRANCHES OF THE ASSESSEE AND ONLY THE FEE IS TAXABLE IN THE HANDS OF THE INDIAN BRANCHES OF THE ASSESSEE FOR THE ROLE PLAYED BY IT IN ARRANG ING THE ECB. THE HONBLE HIGH COURT OF DELHI IN THE CASE OF GE PACKAGE POWERINK (SUPRA) HAS BEEN PLEASED TO HOLD T HAT NO INTEREST UNDER SECTION 234B OF THE ACT CAN BE LEVIE D WHERE THE PAYMENT TO NONRESIDENT PAYEE IS SUBJECT T O TAX DEDUCTION AT SOURCE. IN THE PRESENT CASE THE ASSES SING OFFICER HIMSELF HAD ADMITTED BY GROSSING UP THE ECB INTEREST BY THE AMOUNT OF TAX BORNE BY THE BORROWER S THAT TAX AT SOURCE HAS BEEN DEDUCTED. WE ARE THUS OF THE VIEW THAT NO INTEREST UNDER SECTION 234B OF THE ACT CAN BE LEVIED FOR THE TAX DEMAND ON ACCOUNT OF ECB INTERES T AND INTEREST UNDER SECTION 234B IS ALSO NOT CHARGEABLE SINCE ECB INTEREST RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE FROM THE BORR OWERS WAS SUBJECT TO TAX DEDUCTION AT SOURCE UNDER SECTIO N 195 OF THE ACT. THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS THUS DIRECTED TO DELETE THE ADDITION MADE ON ACCOUNT OF INTEREST REC EIVED FROM ECB GIVEN TO INDIAN BORROWERS. THE GROUND NO. 7 IS ACACCORDINGLY ALLOWED. 11 8. WE FURTHER FIND THAT SIMILAR VIEW WAS TAKEN BY T HE CO-ORDINATE BENCH IN ASSESSMENT YEARS 2008-09 2011-12 AND 2013 -14. RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE FINDINGS OF THE CO-ORDINATE BENCH GR OUND NO. 2 IS DECIDED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE AND AGAINST THE R EVENUE. 9. GROUND NO. 3 RELATES TO THE DEDUCTION U/S 44C OF THE ACT. 10. THIS GROUND IS TAKEN WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO GROUN D NO. 2 ABOVE. SINCE GROUND NO. 2 STANDS DECIDED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE GROUND NO. 3 BECOMES OTIOSE. 11. GROUND NO. 4 RELATES TO THE LEVY OF INTEREST U/ S 234D OF THE ACT. 12. BEFORE US THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE FUR NISHED AN INTIMATION U/S 143(1) OF THE ACT AND POINTED OUT TH AT REFUND WAS ADJUSTED AGAINST THE DEMAND ON 31.10.2012. THIS SH OWS THAT REFUND WAS NEVER GRANTED TO THE ASSESSEE BUT WAS ADJUSTED AGAINST THE DEMAND. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE ALSO FURN ISHED INCOME TAX COMPUTATION FORM AND POINTED OUT THAT INTEREST HAS BEEN LEVIED U/S 234D OF THE ACT FOR THE PERIOD 10.07.2009 TO JULY 2 016. THE DATE OF THIS INCOME TAX COMPUTATION IS 28.07.2016. IT IS T HE SAY OF THE LD. 12 COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE THAT ON THESE FACTS NO IN TEREST IS LEVIABLE U/S 234D OF THE ACT SINCE THE REFUND HAS BEEN ADJUSTED AGAINST THE DEMAND VIDE ORDER DATED 31.10.2012. 13. ON THE OTHER HAND THE LD. DR COULD NOT POINT O UT ANY FACTUAL DEFECTS IN THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE LD. COUNSEL FOR T HE ASSESSEE. 14. WE HAVE CAREFULLY CONSIDERED THE INTIMATION U/S 143(1) OF THE ACT DATED 31.10.2012 AND THE INCOME TAX COMPUTATION FOR M DATED 28.07.2016. WE FIND FORCE IN THE CONTENTION OF THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE THAT REFUND WAS ADJUSTED AGAINST THE OUTST ANDING DEMAND VIDE ORDER DATED 31.10.2012. THEREFORE IN OUR CON SIDERED OPINION THE REVENUE ERRED IN LEVYING INTEREST U/S 234D OF T HE ACT FOR THE PERIOD JULY 2009 TO JULY 2016. WE ACCORDINGLY DI RECT THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO DELETE THE INTEREST SO LEVIED. 15. GROUND NO. 5 RELATES TO THE CLAIM OF SET OFF OF BROUGHT FORWARD BUSINESS LOSSES AND UNABSORBED DEPRECIATION. 13 16. WE DIRECT THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO ALLOW SET OF F OF BROUGHT FORWARD BUSINESS LOSSES AND UNABSORBED DEPRECIATION AS PER PROVISIONS OF LAW. 17. IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IN I TA NO. 4584/DEL/2016 IS ALLOWED. THE ORDER IS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 16.09. 2019. SD/- SD/- [ AMIT SHUKLA ] [N.K. BILLAIYA] JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 16 TH SEPTEMBER 2019 VL/ COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR ASST. REGISTRAR ITAT NEW DELHI 14 DATE OF DICTATION DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE THE OTHER MEMBER DATE ON WHICH THE APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.PS /PS DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER FOR PRONOUNCEMENT DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER COMES BACK TO THE SR.PS/PS DATE ON WHICH THE FINAL ORDER IS UPLOADED ON THE WE BSITE 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 RE GISTRAR FOR SIGNATURE ON THE ORDER DATE OF DISPATCH OF THE ORDER