CHAPTER: VI

RECOMMENDATIONS

1. Misuse of exemption on Long Term Capital gains tax for

money laundering ( Reference p. 82-84 of the Third SIT

Report)

This issue was deliberated by SIT during a series of meetings

held on 07t January, 14th March, 08th April and 30th April. In this

regard, it is pertinent to mention the observations of the

Committee headed by Chairman, CBDT on “Measures to tackle

Black Money in India and Abroad” which submitted it’s report

in 2012 and which read as follows :-

“3.22 Investments are made in the secondary share markets with

a view to capturing gains. In this market, out of nearly 8,000

listed companies, several scrips are not traded regularly. With the

collusion of promoters, some brokers arrange for price(s) with

purchase of such scrips at nominal costs, and sales at

exorbitant prices, with a view to receiving money on sale as

‘capital gain’ when the long term gain is subjected to a ‘nil’ or

nominal rate of tax. The advantage for manipulative taxpayer is

that he can launder such sale receipts through payment of no

tax.”

SEBI has recently barred more than 250 entities, including

individuals and companies, from the securities market for

suspected tax evasion and laundering of black money through

stock market platforms. In one such instance price of a scrip

rose from Rs. 10.20 to Rs. 489 in 150 trading days – a rise of

4694% ! The SIT obtained the background details of these cases

and studied them. A typical pattern is observed to be followed in

such cases.

• A company with very poor financial fundaments in terms of

past income or turnover is able to raise huge capital by

allotment of Preferential allotment of shares is made to

various entities.

• There is a sharp rise in price of scrip once the preferential

allotment is done. This is normally achieved through

circular trading of shares among a select group of

companies. These group of companies often have common

promoters/directors.

• The scrips with thus artificially inflated price are offloaded

through companies whose funding is provided by the same

set of people who want to convert black money into white.

There is an urgent need for having an effective preventive and

punitive action is such matters to prevent recurrence of such

instances.

We recommend the following measures in this regard :

(i) SEBI needs to have an effective monitoring mechanism to

study such unusual rise of stock prices of Companies

while such a rise is taking place. We understand that

SEBI has a strong IT infrastructure which can generate

red flags for such instances. Such red flags could be built

upon trading volumes, entities which contribute to

trading volume, financial background of firms through

their annual returns and any other indicators SEBI may

develop. We believe that with effective and timely

monitoring by SEBI a significant number of such

instances can be checked in time.

(ii) Once such instances are detected, SEBI should invariably

share this information with CBDT and FIU.

(iii) Barring such entities from securities market would not be

of strong deterrence in itself. In case it is established,

that stock platforms have been misused for taking LTCG

benefits, prosecution should invariably be launched

under relevant sections of SEBI Act. Section 12A read

with section 24 of the Securities and Exchange Board of

India Act 1992 are predicate offences.

(iv) Enforcement Directorate should then be informed to take

action under Prevention of Money Laundering Act for the

predicate offences.

2. Misuse of Participatory notes for money laundering

(Reference p. 79-81 of Third SIT Report)

The Report of the Committee headed by Chairman, CBDT on

“Measures to tackle Black Money in India and Abroad”

submitted in 2012 observed as follows :

“3.43 A Participatory Note (PN) is a derivative instrument issued

in foreign jurisdictions, by a Foreign Institutional Investor (FII) /

sub-accounts or one of its associates, against underlying Indian

securities. PNs are popular among foreign investors since they

allow these investors to earn returns on investment in the Indian

market without undergoing the significant cost and time

implications of directly investing in the India. These instruments

are traded overseas outside the direct purview of Securities &

Exchange Board of India (SEBI) surveillance thereby raising

many apprehensions about the beneficial ownership and the

nature of funds invested in these instruments. Concerns have

been raised that some of the money coming into the market via

PNs could be the unaccounted wealth camouflaged under the

guise of FII investment. SEBI has been taking measures to

ensure that PNs are not used as conduits for black money or

terrorist funding. As per SEBI regulations, PNs can be issued to

only those entities that are regulated by an appropriate regulator

in the countries of their incorporation and are subject to

compliance of “Know Your Client” norms. FIIs are also required

to declare that these PNs have not been issued to Indian

residents or non-resident Indians. Entities issuing PNs are

required to submit to SEBI a monthly report which includes

details of subscribers and details of securities underlying PNs.

Though, the information sought from FIIs issuing PNs are being

submitted regularly, the reporting requirements mandated by

SEBI presently do not capture details of ultimate beneficial

owners of these instruments.”

As per SEBI(Foreign Portfolio Investor) Regulations, 2014,

Foreign Portfolio Investors (FPIs) can issue ODIs to only those

entities that are regulated by an appropriate foreign regulatory

authority subject to compliance with ‘Know Your Client” norms.

SEBI, vide its circular dated November 24, 2014 has further

listed set of criteria for the subscribers of P notes or Offshore

Derivative Instruments(ODIs).

SEBI has informed that the outstanding value of Offshore

Derivative Instruments(ODIs) at the end of February 2015 stood

at Rs. 2.715 lakh crores. SEBI has further informed that the top

five locations of end Beneficial owner of ODIs were Cayman

Islands, USA, UK, Mauritus and Bermuda contributing to

31.31%, 14.20 %, 13.49 %, 9.91 % and 9.10 % respectively of

total ODIs outstanding.

It is clear from above than a major chunk of outstanding ODIs

invested in India are from Cayman Islands i.e. 31.31 %. This

translates to roughly Rs. 85,006 Crores. The Cayman Islands had

a population of 54,397 in 2010 according to Wikipedia. It does

not seem conceivable that a jurisdiction with a population of less

than 55,000 could invest Rs. 85,000 crores in one country.

The main point of the above elaboration is just that it does not

appear possible for the final beneficial owner of ODIsoriginating

from Cayman Islands to be from that jurisdiction.

The following recommendations are made in this regard :

(i) It is clear that obtaining information on “beneficial

ownership” of P notes is of crucial importance to prevent

their misuse. SEBI needs to examine the issue raised

above and come up with regulations where the “final

beneficial owner” of P notes/ODIs are known.

(ii) The information of “beneficial owner” with SEBI should

be in form of individual whose KYC information is known

to SEBI. In no case should the KYC information end with

name of a company. In case a company is the holder of P

notes/ODIs, SEBI should have information of its

promoters/directors who exercise effective control over

the company. In case of Companies/Trusts represented

by service providers like lawyers/accountants SEBI

should have information on the real owners/effective

controllers of those Companies/Trusts. not end with

name

(iii) P notes are transferable in nature. This makes tracing the

“true beneficial owner” of P notes even more difficult since

layering of transactions can be made so complex so as to

make it impossible to track the “true beneficial owner”.

SEBI needs to examine if this provision of allowing

transferring of P notes is in any way beneficial for easing

foreign investment. Any investor wanting to invest

through P notes can always invest afresh through an

Foreign Portfolio Investor(FPI) instead of buying from a P

note holder.

3. Shell Companies and beneficial ownership( Reference p.

73-76 of the Third SIT Report)

The Report of the Committee headed by Chairman, CBDT on

“Measures to tackle Black Money in India and Abroad”

submitted in 2012 observed as follows :

“3.4 The primary method of generation of black money remains

suppression of receipts and inflation of expenditure. The

suppression could be over a range of businesses and industrial

activities which are covered by what may be called ‘primary’

enactments to regulate sale receipts, actual production, charging

amount in excess of statutory amounts, etc. …..

3.6 However, as manipulation of income is not always possible by

suppression of receipts, tax-payers may try to inflate expenses

by obtaining bogus or inflated invoices from ‘bill masters’, who

make bogus vouchers and charge nominal commission. As these

persons are of very modest means, upon investigation, they tend

to leave the business and migrate from the city where they

operate. This is one of the reasons for a proportion of income tax

arrears attributed to ‘assessee not traceable’.

3.7 Similarly, there are other categories of small ‘entry operators’,

who provide accommodation entries by accepting cash in lieu of

cheque/ demand draft given as loans / advances / share capital,

etc and thereby launder large sums of money at miniscule

commissions. Due to frequent migration, such entry operators

escape prosecution under the Income Tax Act. The appellate tax

bodies also tend to tax their income at nominal rates. There is no

effective deterrence, except for taxing commission on such bogus

receipts and tax in the hands of beneficiaries. Providing fake bills

and entries need to be dealt with strongly and as criminal

offence under the tax laws.”

Use of shell companies to provide accommodation entries to

launder black money has been observed in a number of high

profile cases investigated or under investigation in the recent

past.

The strategy to curb this menace has to be two fold :

(i) Proactive detection of creation of shell companies : This

would involve intelligence gathering through regular data

mining and dissemination of information gathered to

various law enforcement agencies for active surveillance.

(ii) Deterrent penal action against persons involved in

creation of shell companies and providing

accommodation entries.

The following recommendations are made in this regard :

(i) Proactive detection of creation of shell companies: Serious

Frauds investigation office(SFIO) under Ministry of

Company needs to actively and regularly mine the MCA

21 database for certain red flag indicators. These red flag

indicators could be based on common DIN numbers in

multiple companies, companies with same address, same

contact numbers, use of only mobile numbers, sudden

and unexpected change in turnover declared in returns

etc. These indicators are illustrative in nature and the

SFIO office can prepare a set of indicators based on its

own experience and consultation with other law

enforcement agencies like CBDT, ED and FIU.

(ii) Sharing of information on such high risk companies with

law enforcement agencies : Once certain companies are

identified through data mining above, the list of such

high risk companies should be shared with CBDT and

FIU for closer surveillance.

(iii) In case after investigation/assessment by CBDT, a case

of creating accommodation entries is clearly established,

the matter should be referred to SFIO to proceed under

relevant sections of IPC for fraud. SFIO should also refer

the matter to Enforcement Directorate for taking action

under PMLA for all such cases of money laundering.

(iv) It has also been observed that in many cases of creation

of shell companies the shareholders or directors of such

Companies are persons of limited financial means like

drivers, cooks or other employees of main persons who

intend to launder black money. Section 89(1) and 89(2)

of the Companies Act, 2013 provides for persons to

declare if they have “beneficial interest” in the shares of

the Company or not. Section 89(4) enjoins the Central

Government to make rules to provide for the manner of

holding and disclosing beneficial interest and beneficial

ownership under this section. The Ministry of Company

Affairs may frame such rules at the earliest.

4. Action under PMLA for Trade Based Money laundering :

Section 132 of the Customs Act has been made a predicate

offence through the Finance Bill 2015. Section 132 of the

Customs Act reads as follows :

“132. False declaration, false documents, etc.—Whoever

makes, signs or uses, or causes to be made, signed or used,

any declaration, statement or document in the transaction

of any business relating to the customs knowing or having

reason to believe that such declaration, statement or

document is false in any material particular, shall be

punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend

to 1[two years], or with fine, or with both.”

Thus any declaration of mispriced goods is a punishable

offence under this Act.

SIT realizes that Trade Based Money laundering through

mispricing of imports/exports is a major means of taking

money out of this country. A strong deterrent action is

needed to curb this menace. The SIT thus recommends

that all cases of Trade based money laundering

detected by DRI where violation of section 132 of

Customs Act ,above the threshold provided for in Part B

of Schedule of PMLA, has been found must be shared by

DRI with the Enforcement Directorate to enable ED to

take action under Prevention of Money Laundering Act.

5. Use of cash in Black economy ( Reference p. 4-6 of Third

SIT Report)

Suggestions, made in Paras: 4 & 5 at Chapter: III of the

Second Report of SIT, are reproduced as under:––

(i) “4. It is suggested that for regulating the possession

and transportation of cash, particularly putting a limitation on

cash holdings for private use and including provisions for

confiscation of cash held beyond prescribed limits, provision

in the Act should be made. It is to be stated that a number of

European countries bar any cash transaction above a

particular limit. This can be done in India too. Again, while

implementing the suggestions, to ensure that small

transactions, which make a bulk of common man’s daily

transactions, are not affected and for that, a threshold limit

could be kept.

Further, for holding of cash/currency notes

also, there should be a limit, by prescribing a reasonable

threshold, may be Rs.10 lacs or Rs.15 lacs. This would

control holding of unaccounted money to a large extent. This

would also control transfer of unaccounted cash from one

destination to other, which at present is rampant, may be by

Angadias or by other means.

5. The aforesaid suggestion is also in conformity with

the observations in the case of Rajendran Chingaravelu vs.

UoI, in CA No.7914 of 2009; ORDER DATED November 24,

2009 (320 ITR 1)) by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. Therein, it

had been observed that “The nation is facing terrorist threats.

Transportation of large sums of money is associated with

distribution of funds for terrorist activities, illegal pay offs,

etc. There is also rampant circulation of unaccounted black

money destroying the economy of the country.”

This is known to all concerned and, therefore,

suggestion made above, be implemented.”

(ii) On the afore–quoted suggestions, the response,

given in the aforesaid Office Memorandum of CBDT, is

reproduced as under:––

“The recommendation has been referred to Department of

Economic Affairs (DEA) for taking appropriate action and

submitting feedback to the SIT. It was ascertained from Shri

Manoj Joshi, Joint Secretary concerned on 7th April 2015 that

the proposal has been sent by DEA to various

Departments/Ministries (including MHA) for inputs which are

awaited.”

(iii) SIT is awaiting the response of the concerned

Departments, as the large cash amount is normally used

in illegal transactions such as, those involving, payment

for drugs/narcotics deals, corruption/bribery, cricket

betting and use of huge cash during elections, etc.

(iv) According to SIT, if holding of cash is restricted and

regulated, to a large extent, it would control circulation of

black money within the country and discourage stashing of

money abroad.

(v) In the meeting held on 30th April, 2015, the

concerned Joint Secretary, Mr. Manoj Joshi remained

present and he stated that the aforesaid issue would be

decided as early as possible.

6. Generation of black money in education sector and

through donations to religious institutions and charities

(Reference p. 84-86 of the Third SIT Report)

SIT sought the response of the Government through the

Revenue Secretary on the following points:––

“1. It is a known fact that well–known schools and colleges

are accepting large donations by cash. That cash

normally would be unaccounted money. For controlling

such transactions, there should be specific provision

that donation shall not be accepted by cash and

whosoever accept it, would be punishable under the

Prevention of Corruption Act, as if he is “deemed to be a

public servant”.

2. Large amount is donated to various religious institutions

or charities. Nobody can object for charity donation but

at the same time, that when large amount is donated, it

should be only accounted money and that payment

should be by account–payee cheque to the charity or the

institution. Even if gift of jewelry is made to the charity

or institution, it should be by mentioning donor’s name

and his PAN Number.”

CBDT informed on details of searches / surveys

conducted by them with respect to above points related to

Education sector and Trusts. In short, the substance of the

brief findings of searches / surveys conducted by the

Department of various entities engaged in area of education

through the Trust reveals that large unaccounted amount is

accepted as donation and in a number of cases, such

donations are used for personal benefits and also for tax

evasion which results into generation of black money. The

report of the said searches in short is at Annexure: A to this

report.

As stated earlier, the person who accepts the donation

and the donor requires to be prosecuted under Prevention of

Corruption Act. For this, itwould require legislative change

which is necessary because now –a –days, donation to

educational institutions which are in demand, is rampant.

In some cases, it goes to Rs.1 crore and more. This would go

long way in curbing the generation and circulation of black

money.

Further, considering the aforesaid report, it appears

that in number of cases, assessment is not finalized. Hence,

CBDT should take appropriate action for expeditious

finalization of the assessment, and if required, punitive

action may be taken.

CBDT shall also share the aforesaid

report/information with the concerned agencies so that

other agencies can also take appropriate action under the

relevant law.

7. Necessity for establishment of additional Courts for

deciding the pending cases under the Income Tax Act,

1961 (I.T. Act) (Reference : Page IV of Executive

Suumary of Third SIT report and extracts from First and

Second SIT reports)

(a) In Para: 4 at Chapter: VI of the First Report dated 13th

August, 2014, it was inter–alia reported that,

“… … approximately 4,939 cases are pending for

disposal before the Metropolitan Magistrate, Mumbai since

more than 10 years. If these cases are decided immediately,

it would have its own deterrent effect. For this purpose,

Additional Chief Judicial Magistrates are required to be

appointed, as there is heavy work load in the Metropolitan

Magistrate Courts, Mumbai.

For expediting the cases, if five additional Courts

of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate are constituted which

try the aforesaid pending cases under Income Tax Act, 1961,

the decision in the said cases would have its own impact.

After deciding income tax cases, cases under Customs &

Excise Act, 1996 can be dealt with by the said Courts……..”

(b) In Para: 13 at Chapter: III of the Second Report

(December, 2014), it was reiterated to constitute five

additional Courts of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate.

Said Para is reproduced as under:––

“13. As suggested in first report, at least 5

Additional Chief Judicial Magistrates Courts in

Mumbai are required to be established for deciding

approx. 5000 pending IT prosecution cases.

It appears that without direction by the

Hon’ble Court, it would be difficult to establish 5 Courts as

suggested. For the establishment of 5 courts, Central

Government shall bear the entire cost.”

(c) In view of the recommendations made by the SIT in the

First and Second Reports, to constitute five additional

Courts of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate; The Revenue

Secretary, DoR, MoF, GoI, vide D.O. Letter No.K–

11022/27/2014–Ad. ED, dated 09th March, 2015, requested

the Chief Secretary, Government of Maharashtra to consult

the High Court of Mumbai for setting up of five additional

Courts of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate.

Thereafter, Chairman, SIT, by a letter dated 26th March,

2015, requested the Hon’ble Chief Justice of High Court of

Mumbai, to look into the matter and give suitable

administrative directions for expeditious setting up of the

Courts which can continuously try the prosecution under

the I.T. Act so that it would have its own deterrent effect.

Action is awaited and it is submitted that if appropriate

direction is issued by the Hon’ble Apex Court, the

suggestion would be implemented at the earliest.

In addition, in view of the SIT, a suitable direction is

required to be issued by the Hon’ble Apex Court to all High

Courts and State Governments to allocate suitable number

of Judges in the trial Courts trying the Income tax,

Customs, Central Excise, Service Tax, PMLA, FEMA, FERA

cases to ensure that these cases are disposed off within one

year of filing the charge–sheet. Similar directions may be

issued to trial Courts to conclude the proceedings of all

foreign asset related prosecutions within one year of their

launching. This would have its own deterrent effect.

8. Need for establishment of Central KYC Registry

(Reference p. XVI of Executive Summary of the Third

SIT Report)

The Second SIT Report in it’s third chapter had observed as

follows :

“At present for entering into financial/business transactions

persons have option to quote their PAN or UID or Passport

number or driving license or any other proof of identity.

However, there is no mechanism/system at present to

connect the data available with each of these independent

proofs of ID. It is suggested that these data bases be

interconnected. This would assist in identifying multiple

transactions by one person with different IDs. A central

KYC Registry should be established with all law enforcement

agencies, Registrar of Companies and financial institutions

having access to its database.”

The Department of Revenue has informed that rules for the

Central KYC Registry to be framed under Prevention of

Money Laundering(Maintenance of Record) Rules have been

finalized by the Department and have been sent to

Legislative Department for vetting. The rules are expected to

be notified shortly. This is expected to expedite the setting

up of this Central KYC Registry which shall be an important

office to tackle the menace of black money and money

laundering more effectively.

SIT insists that Central KYC Registry(CKYC) should be

notified as early as possible.

9. GENERATION OF BLACK MONEY DUE TO CRICKET

BETTING (Reference p.68 -71 of the Third SIT Report)

1. In the report (February, 2015) namely, “A study on

widening of tax base and tackling black money” of

Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce and Industry

(FICCI), generation of black money in various sectors of

Indian Economy is discussed in detail. Substance of the

said Report in relation to generation of black money due to

“betting” is as under:––

Betting in sports is illegal in the country, and hence,

creates a wide scope for black money generation. In India,

only betting on horse racing, lotteries conducted by state

governments and casinos in certain states are permissible.

According to 2012 FICCI and KPMG report, betting in

India is a INR 3,00,000 crore (Rupees Three Lacs Crores)

market and if taxed at a rate of 20 percent, the exchequer

can earn revenue of INR 12,000 crore to INR 19,000 crore

every year.

Cricket betting is widespread in the country. As there

are no legitimate means on placing bets, hence, people

resort to illegal channels such as bookies/bookmaker that

facilitate gambling by setting odds, accepting and placing

bets and paying out winnings on behalf of other people.

Illegal betting leads to malpractices such as match–fixing or

spot–fixing wherein the bookie fixes the outcome of the

event in his favor by having an illegal agreement with the

sportsperson. This leads to bettors being cheated at the

hands of bookmakers, thereby enabling them to earn huge

sums of black money.

The Indian Premier League (IPL) has been marred by

betting and spot fixing scandals and involvement of huge

amount of black money. As per news reports, some of the

players are paid more than the payment slabs prescribed by

the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI), with certain

amount paid through legitimate means and some in black.

During the IPL 2013 season, in a sport fixing scam, several

cricketers were arrested for accepting money from bookies

to throw away matches.

2. In the aforesaid context, in the Judgment rendered in

the case of Board of Control for Cricket in India v/s.

Cricket Association of Bihar & Ors. [JT 2015 (1) SC 526],

the Hon’ble Supreme Court observed that,

“Allegations of sporting frauds like match fixing and betting

have for the past few years cast a cloud over the working of

the Board of Cricket Control in India (BCCI). Cricket being

more than just a sport for millions in this part of the world,

accusations of malpractices and conflict of interests against

those who not only hold positions of influence in the BCCI but

also own franchises and teams competing in the IPL format

have left many a cricketing enthusiasts and followers of the

game worried and deeply suspicious about what goes on in

the name of the game. There is no denying the fact that

lowers the threshold of tolerance for any wrong doing higher

is the expectation of the people, from the system. And cricket

being not only a passion but a great unifying force in this

country, a zero tolerance approach towards any wrong

doing alone can satisfy the cry for cleansing.”

Further, the Court referred to “fundamental sporting

imperatives” stated in the Anti Corruption Code, which is

claimed to have been adopted by BCCI. One of the

imperatives is:––

“1.1.3 Advancing technology and increasing popularity

have led to a substantial increase in the amount, and the

sophistication of betting on cricket matches. The development

of new betting products, including spread-betting and betting

exchanges, as well as internet and phone accounts that allow

people to place a bet at any time and from any place, even

after a cricket match has started, have all increased the

potential for the development of corrupt betting practices…”

3. Involvement of huge illegal, unaccounted money in

cricket betting has been noticed by ED, where betting was

being done over internet or using electronic gadgets. It is

also stated that some websites (may be outside the country)

are providing online betting facilities for various sport

events, such as cricket, football, etc.

4. Considering the aforesaid discussions, it is apparent

that illegal activity of cricket betting requires to be

controlled by some provisions which are deterrent to all the

concerned.

It is true that betting in gambling is a subject on which

State Governments have to pass appropriate law, as it is a

State subject in the State List (Entry 34). However,

considering the fact that large amount of black money is

generated and used in this sector, it is suggested that some

appropriate legislative directions or rules or regulations are

required to be put in place to curb the menace of such

betting.

10. Empowerment of DRI under section 20,21 and 22

of SEZ Act ( Reference p. XVI of Executive Summary of

Third SIT Report)

One limitation faced by Directorate of Revenue Intelligence

(DRI) in investigating cases of misinvoicing or violations of

Customs Act is that presently DRI is notempowered under

section 20,21 and 22 of the SEZ Act, to carry out

investigation, inspection, search or seizure in the Special

Economic Zone or Unit without prior intimation or

approval of the Development Commissioner. Department of

Commerce has so far issued only entry passes for some DRI

officers for certain SEZs.

Further, as per the Foreign Trade Policy 2015-2020

announced recently, SEZ has been allowed to avail benefits

of Chapter 3 on par with Domestic Tariff Area Units. In

effect, SEZ units would avail export incentives available

under (i) Merchandise Exports from India scheme (MEIS) or

(ii) Service Exports from India Scheme (SEIS). In view of the

same, now it has become even more imperative to notify the

DRI under the 2nd proviso of section 22 of the SEZ Act to

safeguard the interest of Revenue.

SIT has been informed that this matter has been taken up

with the Ministry of Commerce by Revenue Secretary and

DRI in the past.

In light of above, it is recommended that Ministry of

Commerce looks into the matter urgently and issues

necessary notifications u/s 20,21 and 22 of the SEZ Act

empowering DRI to carry out investigation, inspection,

search or seizure in the Special Economic Zone or Unit

without prior intimation or approval of the Development

Commissioner.

MR. JUSTICE M. B. SHAH (RETD.) CHAIRMAN

DR. JUSTICE ARIJIT PASAYAT (RETD.) VICE–CHAIRMAN