ACIT RG 9(1), MUMBAI v. M/s. AXIS ELECTRICAL COMPONENTS INDIA LTD P. LTD, MUMBAI

ITA 4711/MUM/2008 | 2005-2006
Pronouncement Date: 09-02-2010 | Result: Dismissed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 471119914 RSA 2008
Assessee PAN AAACA9691C
Bench Mumbai
Appeal Number ITA 4711/MUM/2008
Duration Of Justice 1 year(s) 6 month(s) 24 day(s)
Appellant ACIT RG 9(1), MUMBAI
Respondent M/s. AXIS ELECTRICAL COMPONENTS INDIA LTD P. LTD, MUMBAI
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 09-02-2010
Appeal Filed By Department
Order Result Dismissed
Bench Allotted A
Tribunal Order Date 09-02-2010
Date Of Final Hearing 01-02-2010
Next Hearing Date 01-02-2010
Assessment Year 2005-2006
Appeal Filed On 15-07-2008
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH A MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI R.K. GUPTA J.M. AND SHRI A.L. GEHLOT A.M. ITA NO. 4711/M/2008 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2005-06 THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX APPELLANT 9(1) ROOM NO. 223 AAYAKAR BHAVAN GROUND FLOOR MUMBAI 400 020. VS. M/S AXIS ELECTRICAL COMPONENTS (I) PVT. LTD. RES PONDENT PLOT NO. 104C GOVT. INDL. ESTATE KANDIVILI (W) MUMBAI 400 063 (PAN AAACA9691C) APPELLANT BY : MR. DEBASHIS CHANDE RESPONDENT BY : MR. DR. K SHIVRAM & MR. PARAS S. SAVLA ORDER PER A.L. GEHLOT A.M.: THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAI NST THE ORDER OF CIT(A)- IX MUMBAI PASSED ON 09.04.2008 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06. 2. GROUND NO.1 RAISED BY THE REVENUE IS AGAINST THE ACTION OF THE CIT(A) IN DELETING ADDITION OF RS. 3 90 104/- MAD E BY THE AO ON ACCOUNT OF UNUTILIZED MODVAT CREDIT. 3. THE AO MADE THE ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF UNUTILIZE D MODVAT CREDIT U/S 145A OF THE ACT ON THE GROUND THAT THE A SSESSEE HAD WRONGLY FOLLOWED EXCLUSIVE METHOD OF ACCOUNTING F OR EXCISE DUTY INCLUDING MODVAT CREDIT. THE AO ACCORDINGLY ENHAN CED THE VALUE OF CLOSING STOCK BY RS. 3 90 104/-. THE CIT(A) DELETED THE ADDITION BY OBSERVING AS UNDER:- ITA NO. 4711/MUM/08 M/S AXIS ELECTRICAL COMPONENTS (I) P. LTD. 2 3.2 I HAVE CAREFULLY CONSIDERED THE ABOVE FACTS OF THE CASE. IN REGARD TO THE MODVAT CREDIT ONE CANNOT IGNORE THE F ACT THAT THE RELEVANT ASSESSMENT YEAR THE ADJUSTMENT IN REGARD TO THE EXCISE DUTY ETC. ON ACCOUNT OF MODVAT CREDIT IS MANDATORIL Y PRESCRIBED IN SECTION 145A OF THE ACT WHICH CAME INTO FORCE W.E.F . 01.04.1999. THEREFORE THE VALUE OF OPENING STOCK PURCHASE SA LES AS WELL AS CLOSING STOCK ARE REQUIRED TO BE ADJUSTED IN TERMS OF THE PROVISION OF THE SAID SECTION IN REGARD TO THE EXCISE DUTY ET C. ATTRIBUTABLE TO IT. IF AFTER SUCH ADJUSTMENT THERE IS ANY AMOUN T THAT IS REQUIRED TO BE BROUGHT TO TAX THE SAID AMOUNT IS T O BE ADDED TO THE INCOME OF THE APPELLANT COMPANY. SECTION 145A R EQUIRES ADJUSTMENT ON ACCOUNT OF EXCISE DUTY ETC. IN THE VA LUE OF OPENING AND CLOSING STOCK OF RAW MATERIAL AND FINISHED GOOD S. THERE IS NO IMPACT ON PROFIT FOR THE YEAR ON ACCOUNT OF THE ADJ USTMENT IN THE STOCK OF RAW MATERIAL FOR THE REASON THAT MODVAT CR EDIT ON PURCHASES IS ACCOUNTED INCOME THAT TAKES CARE OF MO DVAT ON THE RAW MATERIAL. AS FAR AS THE VALUATION OF INVENTORY OF FINISHED GOODS IS CONCERN THE VALUATION SHOULD BE AFTER INC LUDING THE VALUE OF EXCISE DUTY IN THE FINISHED GOODS VALUATIO N. FINISHED GOODS VALUE AS ON 31.03.2005 IN VIEW THE PROVISION OF SECTION 145A WILL BE INCREASED BY AN AMOUNT OF RS. 6 96 518 /-. THE APPELLANTS CLAIMS OF THE DEDUCTION OF THE AMOUNT O F EXCISE DUTY ADDED IN THE VALUE OF FINISHED GOODS AMOUNTING TO R S. 6 96 518/- THAT IS PAID SUBSEQUENTLY AFTER THE CLOSE OF FINANC IAL YEAR BUT BEFORE DUE DATE OF FILING OF RETURN UNDER SECTION 1 39(1) AS ALLOWABLE DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 43B IS ALSO CORRE CT. IN VIEW OF DISCUSSION IN THE ABOVE PARA. THE AO IS DIRECTED TO DELETE THE ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF MODVAT CREDIT. THIS GROUND O F APPEAL IS ALLOWED. 4. THE LEARNED DR RELIED UPON THE ORDER OF THE AO W HEREAS THE LEARNED AR RELIED UPON THE ORDER OF CIT(A) AND SUBM ITTED THAT THIS ISSUE IS COVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE BY THE ORDER OF ITAT IN EARLIER YEAR VIDE ITA NO. 377/MUM/2007 ORDER DATED 11 TH JUNE 2009. 5. WE HAVE HEARD THE LEARNED REPRESENTATIVES OF THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE RECORD AS WELL AS GONE THROUGH THE ORDE R OF ITAT CITED SUPRA. WE FIND THAT ON IDENTICAL SET OF FACTS THE I TAT IN AY 2003-04 HAS CONFIRMED THE ORDER OF CIT(A) BY OBSERVING AS U NDER:- 5. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. WE FIN D THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS PASSED A DETAILED AND SPEAKING ORDER ON THE ISSUE. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS HELD THAT THE AMOUNTS OF TAX DU TIES ETC. TO BE ADJUSTED IN THE ACCOUNTS IN THE MANNER PROVIDED IN THE SECTION IS A MATTER OF VERIFICATION FROM THE EXCISE RECORDS . THE LD. CIT(A) ITA NO. 4711/MUM/08 M/S AXIS ELECTRICAL COMPONENTS (I) P. LTD. 3 HAS DIRECTED THE AO TO MAKE THE ADJUSTMENT IN TERMS OF THE DIRECTIONS GIVEN IN THE APPELLATE ORDER OR IN REGAR D TO THE STOCKS PURCHASE SALES EXCISE DUTY PAYMENTS AND IF SUCH A DJUSTMENT RESULTS IN AN ADDITION TO THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSE E RESTRICT THE ADDITION ONLY TO THAT EXTENT AND ACCORDINGLY PARTLY ALLOWED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE. THEIR BEING NO MISTAKE IN T HE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) WE CONFIRM THE SAME. GROUND NO. 1 OF RE VENUES APPEAL IS DISMISSED. 5.1 THE CIT(A) HAS GIVEN A FINDING AFTER VERIFICATI ON OF FACTS THAT EVEN ANY ADDITION IS TO BE MADE IN THE VALUE OF FIN ISHED GOODS AMOUNTING TO RS. 6 96 518/- WHICH IS PAID SUBSEQUE NTLY AFTER THE CLOSE OF THE F.Y. BUT BEFORE THE DUE DATE OF FILING OF RETURN UNDER SECTION 139(1) AS ALLOWABLE DEDUCTION U/S 43B OF TH E ACT. SINCE THERE IS NO CONTRARY MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD NOR SAM E HAVE BEEN POINTED OUT BY THE REVENUE AND IN THE LIGHT OF DECI SION OF ITAT IN AY 2003-04 IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE CITED SUPRA WE DO N OT FIND ANY INFIRMITY IN THE ORDER OF CIT(A) THEREFORE THE SA ME IS HEREBY CONFIRMED. 6. GROUND NO.2. IS AGAINST THE ACTION OF THE CIT(A) IN DIRECTING THE AO TO DELETE THE ADDITION OF RS. 20 87 689/- BEING 25% OF PAYMENT MADE TO SISTER CONCERN U/S 40A(2)(B) OF THE ACT. 7. THE AO NOTICED THAT THE ASSESSEE COMPANY MADE PA YMENT OF RS. 83 50 793/- TO ITS SISTER CONCERN M/S PARAMOUNT COM MERCIAL CORPORATION P. LTD. WHICH IS COVERED U/S 40A(2)(B) OF THE ACT. THE AO MADE 25% DISALLOWANCE OBSERVING THAT THE SISTER CON CERN HAS INDEPENDENT SET UP AND ARE OPENING SINCE LAST MANY YEARS AS SUCH THERE IS NO JUSTIFICATION OF PAYMENT MADE TO THE SI STER CONCERN SINCE THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT PROVIDED ANY COMPARATIVE ANALY SIS OF CHARGES PAID TO THE SISTER CONCERN. THE CIT(A) ACCEPTED THE ASSESSEES SUBMISSIONS AND DELETED THE ADDITION BY OBSERVING AS UNDER:- 6.2 I HAVE CAREFULLY CONSIDERED THE ABOVE FACTS OF THE CASE. IT MAY BE SEEN FROM THE ASSESSMENT ORDER THAT THE DISA LLOWANCE HAS BEEN MADE BY THE AO MERELY FOR THE REASON THAT THE PAYMENT HAS BEEN MADE TO THE SISTER CONCERN AND THESE SISTE R CONCERNS HAVE INDEPENDENT SET-UP. HOWEVER THERE IS NO JUSTI FICATION FOR ITA NO. 4711/MUM/08 M/S AXIS ELECTRICAL COMPONENTS (I) P. LTD. 4 THE ADHOC DISALLOWANCE @ 25% OF THE TOTAL PAYMENT M ADE TO THE SISTER CONCERN. IT IS OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS AN EXPORTER OF ELECTRICAL COMPONENTS. THE MANUFACTURED GOODS ARE S OURCED ON JOB WORK BASIS FROM VARIOUS PARTIES INCLUDING M/S P ARAMOUNT COMMERCIAL CORPORATION PVT. LTD. AND ALL THE PAYMEN TS MADE TO THE SISTER CONCERNS HAVE BEEN DULY REPORTED IN AUDI T REPORT IN FORM 3CD AS COVERED BY 40A(2)(B). NO EVIDENCE HAS B EEN BROUGHT ON RECORD TO PROVE THAT EXCESSIVE PAYMENTS WERE MAD E. UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES THE AO IS THEREFORE DIRECTED TO DELE TE THE ADDITION. THIS GROUND OF APPEAL IS ALLOWED. 8. THE LEARNED DR RELIED UPON THE ORDER OF THE AO W HEREAS THE LEARNED AR RELIED UPON THE ORDER OF CIT(A) AND SUBM ITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS MAKING SUCH PAYMENTS FOR JOB WORK FOR T HE PAST 20 YEARS. THE LEARNED AR FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT DISALLOWANCE MADE IN EARLIER YEAR IN AY 2003-04 HAS BEEN DELETED BY THE ITAT VID E ITA NO. 377/MUM/07 ORDER DATED 11 TH JUNE 2009 WHEREIN THE ITAT HELD AS UNDER:- 14. THE LD. DR HAS RELIED ON THE ORDER OF AO. THE L D. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THERE IS NO REVENUE LOSS TO THE DEPARTMENT BY THE PAYMENT MADE TO THE SISTER CONCER N BY THE ASSESSEE. HE HAS FILED A STATEMENT OF TOTAL TAXES P AID AS PER RETURNED INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE AND STATEMENT OF TA X LIABILITY AFTER CONSIDERING THE DISALLOWANCE U/S 40A(2)(B) OF THE ACT WHICH SHOWS THAT THERE IS NO REVENUE LOSS ON THIS ISSUE. IN THESE FACTS WE HOLD THAT THERE IS NO MISTAKE IN THE ORDER OF LD . CIT(A) IN HOLDING THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS MADE PAYMENT TO SISTE R CONCERN FOR LABOUR CHARGES FOR MANUFACTURING COMPANIES PRODUCTS AND FOR PURCHASE OF MATERIAL AND THERE IS NOTHING TO SHOW T HAT THE EXCESSIVE PAYMENT ARE MADE. IN THESE FACTS WE CONF IRM THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) ON THIS ISSUE AND DISMISS THIS GROUND OF THE REVENUE. 9. WE HAVE HEARD THE LEARNED REPRESENTATIVES OF THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE RECORD AS WELL AS GONE THROUGH THE ORDE R OF CIT(A). SINCE THE ISSUE IS COVERED BY THE DECISION OF ITAT IN ASS ESSEES OWN CASE IN AY 2003-04 WHEREIN THE ITAT CONFIRMED THE ORDER OF CIT(A) WE RESPECTFULLY FOLLOW THE ORDER OF ITAT AND IN THE LI GHT OF THAT WE CONFIRM THE ORDER OF CIT(A) ON THIS ISSUE. ITA NO. 4711/MUM/08 M/S AXIS ELECTRICAL COMPONENTS (I) P. LTD. 5 10. GROUND NO. 3 IS IN RESPECT OF DELETION OF ADDIT ION OF RS. 37 97 911/- MADE ON ACCOUNT OF SUNDRY CREDITORS BAL ANCES AS UNEXPLAINED EXPENDITURE. 11. DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS TH E AO MADE ENQUIRY U/S 133(6) IN RESPECT OF PURCHASES AND EXPE NSES INCURRED BY THE ASSESSEE. IN SOME CASES NOTICES U/S 133(6) WER E ISSUES BUT THERE WAS NO RESPONSE AND SOME NOTICES WERE RETURNED BY T HE POSTAL AUTHORITIES. IN SOME OF THE CASES THE AO NOTICED D ISCREPANCIES AS PER THE ASSESSEES SUBMISSION AND AS PER THE PARTIES SU BMISSION. THEREFORE THE AO MADE ADDITION OF RS. 8 46 458/- A S UNEXPLAINED EXPENDITURE. THE CIT(A) DELETED THE ADDITION BY OBS ERVING AS UNDER:- 7.3 I HAVE CAREFULLY CONSIDERED THE ABOVE FACTS OF THE CASE AOS CONTENTION AS WELL AS DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE FIL ED BY THE APPELLANT. SO FAR AS LIST A IS CONCERNED IT IS FO UND THAT THE APPELLANT HAS SATISFACTORILY EXPLAINED THE DIFFEREN CE IN PARTYS ACCOUNT VIS--VIS BALANCE IN ASSESSEES BOOKS OF AC COUNTS AND ALL THE COPIES OF ACCOUNT ALONG WITH THE PAYMENT DETAIL S AND RECONCILIATION STATEMENT HAS BEEN FILED. EVEN THE P ARTIES HAD APPEARED BEFORE THE AO AND SUBMITTED THE DETAILS EX PLAINING THE DIFFERENCES BY FILING NECESSARY DETAILS. SO FAR AS LIST B IS CONCERNED THE APPELLANT HAS FILED PARTYS CONFIRMA TION COPY OF ACCOUNT IN THE APPELLANTS BOOK COPY OF INVOICES BANK STATEMENT REFLECTING THE PAYMENT TO THE PARTIES. MERELY FOR T HE REASON THAT THE PARTIES COULD NOT TURN UP IN RESPONSE TO NOTICE U/S 133(6) PURCHASES/EXPENSES CANNOT BE TREATED AS BOGUS. THUS THE ONUS WHICH LIES ON ASSESSEE HAS BEEN FULLY DISCHARGED. I T WOULD BE APT TO REFER TO THE JUDGMENT OF APEX COURT IN CASE OF O RISSA CORPORATION (159 ITR 78). IN THIS CASE THE ASSESSEE HAD GIVEN THE NAMES AN D ADDRESSES OF THE ALLEGED CREDITORS. IT WAS IN THE KNOWLEDGE OF THE REVENUE THAT THE SAID CREDITORS WERE INCOME- TAX ASSESSEES. THEIR INDEX NUMBERS WERE IN THE FILE OF THE REVENUE. THE REVENUE APART FROM ISSUING NOTICES UN DER SECTION 131 AT THE INSTANCE OF THE ASSESSEE DID NO T PURSUE THE MATTER FURTHER. THE REVENUE DID NOT EXAMINE THE SOURCE OF INCOME OF THE SAID ALLEGED CREDITORS TO FIND OUT WHETHER THEY WERE CREDITWORTHY OR WERE SUCH WHO COULD ADVAN CE THE ALLEGED LOANS. THERE WAS NO EFFORT MADE TO PURS UE THE SO-CALLED ALLEGED CREDITORS. IN THOSE CIRCUMSTANCES THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT DO ANYTHING FURTHER. IN THE PREM ISES IF THE TRIBUNAL CAME TO THE CONCLUSION THAT THE ASSESS EE HAS DISCHARGED THE BURDEN THAT LAY ON HIM THEN IT COUL D NOT BE ITA NO. 4711/MUM/08 M/S AXIS ELECTRICAL COMPONENTS (I) P. LTD. 6 SAID THAT SUCH A CONCLUSION WAS UNREASONABLE OR PER VERSE OR BASED ON NO EVIDENCE. IF THE CONCLUSION IS BASED ON SOME EVIDENCE ON WHICH A CONCLUSION COULD BE ARRIVED AT NO QUESTION OF LAW AS SUCH ARISES. BESIDES THIS I ALSO FIND FORCE IN THE APPELLANTS CONTENTION THAT IF PURCHASES WERE BOGUS TO THAT EXTENT SALES ALSO SHO ULD HAVE BEEN TREATED AS BOGUS AND SAME SHOULD HAVE BEEN REDUCED FROM THE SALES BECAUSE FOR EVERY PURCHASE THERE WAS CORRESP ONDING SALES. HOWEVER SALES FIGURE HAS NOT BEEN DISTURBED BY THE AO NOR THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS HAVE BEEN REJECTED. THE ACCOUNTS OF THE APPELLANT ARE AUDITED AND ARE NOT REJECTED AS BEING INCOMPLETE OR NOT PROPERLY MAINTAINED. THE TRANSACTION OF SALE PU RCHASE AND INVENTORY ARE ALSO ACCEPTED. THUS IN THE ABSENCE O F ANY EVIDENCE CONTRARY TO THE EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPELLANT NO DISALLOWANCE CAN BE MADE U/S 69C OF THE IT ACT ON THE GROUND THAT PARTIES MENTIONED IN LIST B DID NOT RESPOND TO THE NOTICE U/S 133(6) OF THE IT ACT. THERE IS NO DEFECT POINTED OU T IN THE RECONCILIATION STATEMENT IN RESPECT OF LIST A BY TH E AO AND IN RESPECT OF LIST B THE APPELLANT HAS FILED SUFFICIE NT DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT OF ITS CONTENTION. UNDER THE CI RCUMSTANCES AND FACTS OF THE CASE AND RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING TH E HONBLE SUPREME COURT JUDGMENT I DIRECT THE AO TO DELETE T HE ADDITION. THIS GROUND OF APPEAL IS ALLOWED. 12. THE LEARNED DR RELIED UPON THE AO WHEREAS THE L EARNED AR RELIED UPON THE ORDER OF CIT(A) AND SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS FURNISHED CONFIRMATION ALL THE DETAILS ANDRECONCI LIATION OF DIFFERENCES. THE REASONS OF DIFFERENCE WERE MAINLY ARISING OUT OF FREIGHT CHARGES DISCOUNTS AND RETURN OF MATERIALS. THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED CONFIRMATION COPIES OF INVOICES DETAILS OF PAYMENT ETC. THE LEARNED AR FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT MERELY BECAUSE TH E PARTY DID NOT RESPOND PURCHASES/EXPENSES CANNOT BE TREATED AS BO GS. HE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE AO HAS NOT REBUTTED THE DETAILS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. ALL THE PARTIES ARE ASSESSED TO TAX. THE LEARNED AR IN SUPPORT OF HIS CONTENTION RELIED UPON THE FOLLOWIN G DECISIONS:- 1. CIT V. U.M. SHAH PROPRIETOR SHRENIK TRADING CO . [1973] 90 ITR 396 (BOM.) 2. A-ONE HOUSING COMPLEX LTD. VS. ITO [2008] 110 IT D 361 (DEL.) 3. KASHUKHA TRADING & SERVICES (P) LTD. V. ITO [200 8] 26 SOT 388(MUM). ITA NO. 4711/MUM/08 M/S AXIS ELECTRICAL COMPONENTS (I) P. LTD. 7 13. WE HAVE HEARD THE LEARNED REPRESENTATIVES OF TH E PARTIES AND PERUSED THE RECORD AS WELL AS GONE THROUGH THE DECI SIONS CITED. WE FIND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS FURNISHED ALL THE RELEVA NT DETAILS INCLUDING RECONCILIATION OF THE DIFFERENCES. THE ENTRIES RECO RDED IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT IS ON DAY-TO-DAY BASIS. THE REVENUE DID NOT POINT OR BROUGHT OUT ANY CONTRARY MATERIAL TO THE FINDINGS OF THE CI T(A) AND IN THE LIGHT OF THAT WE DO NOT FIND ANY INFIRMITY IN THE ORDER O F THE CIT(A) THEREFORE THE SAME IS HEREBY CONFIRMED. 14. IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DIS MISSED. PRONOUNCED ON THIS 9 TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2010 SD/- SD/- (R.K. GUPTA) (A.L. GEHLOT) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTAN T MEMBER DATED: 9 TH FEBRUARY 2010 COPY TO:- 1) THE APPELLANT. 2) THE RESPONDENT. 3) THE CIT (A) CONCERNED. 4) THE CIT CONCERNED. 5) THE DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE A BENCH I.T .A.T. MUMBAI. BY ORDER //TRUE COPY// ASST. REGISTRAR I.T.A.T. MUMBAI. KV S.NO. DESCRIPTION DATE INTLS 1. DRAFT DICTATED ON 01.02.10 SR.P.S./P.S 2. DRAFT PLACED BEFORE AUTHOR 02.02.10 SR.P.S/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.P.S./PS SR.P.S./P.S 6. KEPT FOR PRONOUNCEMENT ON SR. P.S./P.S. ITA NO. 4711/MUM/08 M/S AXIS ELECTRICAL COMPONENTS (I) P. LTD. 8 7. FILE SENT TO THE BENCH CLERK SR.P.S./P.S 8 DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK 9 DATE OF DISPATCH OF ORDER