ACIT, Bhiwani V. Haryana Kshetriya Gramin Bank,

ITA 582/DEL/2009

• Counselvise Citation: 58220114 RSA 2009
• Duration Of Justice: 6 year(s) 6 month(s) 2 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 20-08-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Next Hearing Date: 18-08-2015
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 17-02-2009
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: NAVEEN KUMAR GOEL
• Keywords: Question of law; Bad and doubtful debts; Tax effect

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH G , NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H.S.SIDHU , JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI O.P.KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 2950 & 2951 /DEL/20 08 AY S : 200 3 - 04 & 2004 - 05 & ITA NO.582/DEL/2009 A.Y. 2005 - 06 A CIT, VS. HARYANA KSHETRIYA GRAMIN BANK BHIWANI CITY CENTRE, HUDA COMPLEX, BHIWANI (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) A PPELLANT BY : SH. SUJIT KUMAR, SR.D.R. RESPONDENT BY : SH. NAVEEN KUMAR GOEL, C.A. ORDER PER H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER ALL THESE THREE APPEALS ARE FILED BY THE REVENUE AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD.CIT(A), ROHTAK DT. 4.7.2008 FOR THE A. Y. 2003 - 04 AND 2004 - 05 AND DATED 17.11.2008 FOR THE A.Y. 2005 - 06 . SINCE THE ISSUE IN DISPUTE INVOLVED IN ALL THESE THREE APPEALS ARE ALMOST IDENTICAL EXCEPT THE AMOUNT OF ADDITION IN DISPUTE, THEREFORE, FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE, THE GROUNDS TAKEN BY TH E REVENUE IN ITA NO.2950/DEL/08 ARE REPRODUCED HEREUNDER. 1 . WHETHER ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE , THE LD.CIT(A) , ROHTAK WAS RIGHT IN DELETING ADDITION OF RS.284.57 LACS MADE ON ACCOUNT OF DISALLOWING THE PROVISION MADE FOR WRITE OFF OF LOANS PARTICULARLY WHEN THESE TYPE OF PROVISIONS ARE NOT ADMISSIBLE UNDER THE LAW. 2. WHETHER ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE , THE LD.CIT(A), ROHTAK WAS RIGHT IN DELETING ADDITION OF RS.1,15,91,500/ - MADE ON ACCOUNT OF IRRECOVE RABLE INTEREST PERTAIN TO THE PROVISION FOR BAD AND DOUBTFUL DEBTS WHEN THESE TYPES OF PROVISIONS ARE NOT ADMISSIBLE UNDER THE LAW. ITA NOS. 2950 AND 2951/DEL/2008 ITA NO.528/DEL/2009 HARYANA KSHETRIYA GRAMIN BANK, BHIWANI A.Y. 2003 - 04, 2004 - 05 AND 2005 - 06 2 3. WHETHER ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE , THE LD.CIT(A), ROHTAK WAS RIGHT IN DELETING ADDITION OF RS.2, 50,000/ - MADE ON ACCOUNT OF DISALLOWANCE OF MISC. EXPENSES WITHOUT APPRECIATING THE FACTS, THAT ASSESSEE HAD FAILED TO FURNISH THE DETAILS THEREOF. 4. THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD OR AMEND THE GROUND S OF APPEAL BEFORE THE APPEAL IS HEARD OR DISPOS ED OFF . 2 . SECONDLY, THE LD. FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY HAS PASSED ALMOST IDENTICAL ORDERS IN ALL THESE THREE APPEALS BY FOLLOWING THE ORDER FOR THE A.Y. 2002 - 03 IN THE ASSESSEE S OWN CASE AND DELETING THE ADDITION IN DISPUTE. THEREFORE, FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE WE ARE DISPOSING OF THESE THREE APPEALS BY PASSING A CONSOLIDATED ORDER. 3. AT THE TIME OF HEARING THE LD.COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE ALSO STATED THAT THE TAX EFFECT IN THESE APPEALS IS LESS THAN RS.4 LAKHS AND THE APPEALS FILED BY THE REVEN UE ARE NOT MAINTAINABLE IN VIEW OF INSTRUCTION NO.5/2014 DT. 10 TH JULY, 2015. HE FURTHER STATED THAT EVEN IF THE ADDITIONS WERE SUSTAINED THERE WOULD BE NO TAX DUE AND THE TAX EFFECT WOULD BE NIL AS THE ASSESSEE WAS ENJOYING THE BENEFIT OF S.80B OF TH E ACT. THE LD.COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE RELIED ON THE ORDER PASSED BY THE HON BLE ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. ZILA SAHKARI BANK LTD. (2014) 45 TAXMANN.COM 438 (ALLAHABAD). 4. ON THE CONTRARY LD.SR.D.R. STATED THAT THE LATEST CIRCULAR ISSUE D BY THE CBDT IS NOT APPLICABLE IN THE PRESENT APPEALS BECAUSE THESE APPEALS HAVE BEEN FILED BY THE REVENUE SINCE LONG IN 2008. LD.SR.DR STATED THAT THE CITATION QUOTED BY THE ASSESSEE IS NOT APPLICABLE IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE 5. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH T HE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL PLACED ON RECORD AND ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE ASSESSEE IS A COOPERATIVE GRAMEEN BANK WHICH FILED ITS RETURN OF INCOME FOR LOSS AFTER CLAIMING VARIOUS DEDUCTIONS MENTIONED IN THE IM PUGNED ORDER AND THE AO HAS DISALLOWED THE SAME BUT FINALLY DELETED BY THE ITAT. IN VIEW OF ITA NOS. 2950 AND 2951/DEL/2008 ITA NO.528/DEL/2009 HARYANA KSHETRIYA GRAMIN BANK, BHIWANI A.Y. 2003 - 04, 2004 - 05 AND 2005 - 06 3 THE INSTRUCTION NO.5 OF THE CBDT DATED 10.7.2014, THE PRESENT APPEAL IS NOT MAINTAINABLE. AS PER THE RECORDS AND THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE, THE ASSESS EE WAS ENJOYING THE BENEFIT OF S.80P OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 AND AS SUCH THE TAX ON THE INCOME IS EXEMPT EVEN IF THE ADDITION IS SUSTAINED THERE WILL BE NO TAX DUE AS THE TAX EFFECT WOULD BE NIL . KEEPING IN VIEW THE DECISION RENDERED BY HON BLE ALLA HABAD HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF ZILA SAHKARI BANK LTD. (SUPRA), THE APPEALS FILED BY THE REVENUE ARE NOT MAINTAINABLE. FOR THE SAKE OF READY REFERENCE WE REPRODUCE HERE IN BELOW THE RELEVANT PART OF HON BLE ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT JUDGEMENT: 5. AFTER HEA RING BOTH THE PARTIES AND ON PERUSAL OF THE RECORDS, IT APPEARS THAT THE ASSESSEE IS ENJOYING THE BENEFIT OF SECTION 80P OF THE ACT AND AS SUCH THE TAX ON AN INCOME IS EXEMPTED. EVEN IF THE ADDITION IS SUSTAINED, THERE WILL BE NO TAX DEMAND AS THE TAX EFF ECT WILL BE NIL. 6. IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. MANGLAM RICINUS LTD. (2008) 174 TAXMAN 186 (DEL), THE HON BLE DELHI HIGH COURT OBSERVED THAT IN SUCH TYPE OF CASES, THE EXERCISE SHALL BE MERELY ACADEMIC EXERCISE. 7. IN THE INSTANT CASE, THE TRIBUNAL OBSERVED THA T IN CASE THE ISSUE ARISING IN THE SUBSEQUENT YEARS AND HAS TAX EFFECT, IT IS LEFT OPEN TO BE CONSIDERED BY THE DEPARTMENT. WITH THIS LIBERTY, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE DEPARTMENT WAS DISMISSED. THE SAME APPEARS REASONABLE IN THE PECULIAR FACTS AND CIRCUMS TANCES OF THE CASE. HENCE, THE ORDER PASSED BY THE TRIBUNAL IS HEREBY SUSTAINED. 8. THUS, IF THE ISSUE HAS ANY IMPACT IN SUBSEQUENT YEARS, WE LEFT IT OPEN TO REVENUE IN THE SUCCEEDING YEARS TO TAKE PROCEEDINGS AS PER LAW , IF NEED BE ARISES. BUT PRESENTLY , WE DO NOT FIND ANY REASON TO INTERFERE WITH THE CONCURRENT FINDINGS RECORDED BY BOTH THE APPELLATE AUTHORITIES. THE SAME ARE HEREBY SUSTAINED ALONG WITH THE REASONS MENTIONED THEREIN. 9. THE ANSWER TO THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTION OF LAW IS IN NEGATIVE I.E. IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE AND AGAINST THE DEPARTMENT. 10. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE DEPARTMENT IS DISMISSED, AS STATED ABOVE. 5 .1. KEEPING IN VIEW THE CBDT INSTRUCTION NO.5 OF 2014 DATED 10 TH JULY, 2014 AND ALSO THE PROVISIONS OF S.268A OF THE ACT, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE REVENUE SHOULD NOT HAVE FILED THE PRESENT APPEALS BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. WHILE TAKING SUCH A VIEW, WE ARE FORTIFIED BY THE FOLLOWING DECISIONS OF THE HON BLE PUNJAB AND HA RYANA HIGH COURT. ITA NOS. 2950 AND 2951/DEL/2008 ITA NO.528/DEL/2009 HARYANA KSHETRIYA GRAMIN BANK, BHIWANI A.Y. 2003 - 04, 2004 - 05 AND 2005 - 06 4 I . CIT VS. OSCAR LABORATORIES P.LTD. (2010) 324 ITR 115 (P&H) II . CIT VS. ABINASH GUPTA (2010) 327 ITR 619 (P&H) III . CIT VS. VARINDERA CONSTRUCTION CO.(2011) 331 ITR 449 (P&H)(FB) 5 .2. SIMILARLY , THE HON BLE DELHI HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. DELHI RACE CLUB LTD. IN ITA NO.128/2008, ORDER DT. 3.3.2011 BY FOLLOWING THE EARLIER ORDER DT. 2.8.2010 IN ITA 179/1991 IN THE CASE OF CIT,DELHI III VS. M/S PS JAIN & CO. HELD THAT SUCH CIRCULAR WOULD ALSO BE APPLICABLE TO PENDING CASES. 5 .3. THUS FROM T HE RATIO LAID DOWN BY THE HON BLE DELHI HIGH COURT, IT IS CLEAR THAT THE INSTRUCTIONS ISSUED IN THE CIRCULARS BY CBDT ARE APPLICABLE FOR PENDING CASES ALSO. THEREFORE, KEEPING IN VIEW THE RATIO LAID DOWN IN THE AFORESAID CASES, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VI EW THAT INSTRUCTION NO.5 OF 2014 DT. 10 TH JULY,2014 ISSUED BY THE CBDT ARE APPLICABLE FOR THE PENDING CASES ALSO AND IN THE PRESENT CASES MONETARY TAX LIMIT IS LESS THAN RS.4LAKHS. 6. EVEN ON MERITS, WE FIND THAT IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER THE LD. FIRST APPEL LATE AUTHORITY HAS DELETED THE ADDITIONS IN DISPUTE BY RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE ORDER FOR THE A.Y. 2002 - 03 IN ASSESSEE S OWN CASE , W E REPRODUCE THE RELEVANT PORTION OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER DT. 4.7.2008 PASSED BY THE LD.CIT(A) FOR THE A.Y. 2003 - 04 IN ITA N O.2950/DEL/2008 PARA 2 TO 8 PAGES 2 TO 5: 2. IN RESPONSE TO NOTICE UNDER SECTION 250, SH. B.B. JAIN, ADVOCATE AND SH. V.K . Y . KHANNA, MANAGER ATTENDED THE PROCEEDINGS AND FILED WR ITTEN SUBMISSIONS. THE WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS WERE CONFRONTED TO THE AO FOR HI S COMMENTS. THE AO GAVE HIS COMMENTS AS PER HIS REMAND REPORT DATED 1 15.5. 2008. THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BY THE APPELLANT AND THE REMAND REPORT OF THE AO HAVE BEEN DULY CONSIDERED. . 3. GROUND OF APPEAL BEARING NOS. 1 & 8 ARE GENERAL IN NATURE; REQUIRE NO ADJ UDICATION AS SUCH. 4. GROUND OF APPEAL BEARING NOS. 2,3 & 4 PERTAIN TO DISALLOWANCE OF PROVISION FOR BAD AND DOUBTFUL DEBT S/LOANS OF RS. 284.57 LACS , THE APPELLANT HAS ITA NOS. 2950 AND 2951/DEL/2008 ITA NO.528/DEL/2009 HARYANA KSHETRIYA GRAMIN BANK, BHIWANI A.Y. 2003 - 04, 2004 - 05 AND 2005 - 06 5 CONTENDED THAT THE AO HAS NOT INTERPRETED THE PROVISIONS OF S. 36 (1) (VII A) OF THE IT ACT. 4.1 THE APPELLANT HAS SUBMITTED THAT THE VERSION OF THE AO AS TO COMPLETE DETAILS HAVING NOT BEEN SUBMITTED BEFORE HIM IS WRONG AND THAT THE ANNUAL REPORT WAS ACTUALLY FILED BEFORE HIM DURING THE ASSESSMENT YEAR. IT HAS FURTHER BEEN ACTUALLY FILED BEFORE HIM DURING THE ASSESSMENT YEAR. IT HAS FURTHER BEEN SUBMITTED THAT THE TOTAL ADVANCES PERTAINING TO 90 BRANCHES HAVE BEEN RS.1687108000/ - OUT OF WHICH AVERAGE ADVANCES GIVEN BY 15 URBAN BRANCHES HAVE BEEN RS.385486000/ - AND ADVANCES MADE BY 75 RUR AL BRANCHES HAVE BEEN RS. 1301622000/ - , 10% OF WHICH WORKS OUT TO RS. 130162200/ - WHEREAS THE APPELLANT HAS CLAIMED ONLY RS. 11591500/ - WHICH IS ONLY ALLOWABLE AS PER THE LIMITS PRESCRIBED U / S 36 (1) (VIII A) OF THE, IT ACT. IT HAS FURTHER BEEN SUBMITTED THAT THE AO HAS WRONGLY MENTIONED IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER THAT THE SUM OF RS. 284.57 LACS HAS BEEN DEB I TED TO THE PROFIT & LOSS ACCOUNT; ACTUALLY THIS SUM HAS BEEN DEB I TED TO THE PROVISION FOR BAD AND DOUBTFUL DEBTS. DURING APPEAL PROCEEDINGS, THE ACCOUNTS OF THE APP ELLANT WERE ATTEMPTED TO BE CHECKED UP VIZ - A - VIZ THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AND THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BY THE APPELLANT. SINCE THE FIGURES MENTIONED IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DID NOT TALLY WITH THE FIGURES AS PER ANNUAL REPORT, THE AR OF THE APPE LLANT REQUESTED FOR THE MATTER TO BE REFERRED TO THE AO FOR EXAMINATION OF THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS VIZ - A - VIZ THE FIGURES MENTIONED IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AND THOSE SUBMITTED BY IT IN THE WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS. ACCORDINGLY A LETTER WAS WRITTEN TO THE AO ON 9. 5.2008 CONVEYING AS UNDER. 'DURING THE APPEAL PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE UNDERSIGNED. THE APPELLANT HAS PRODUCED FIGURES OF VARIOUS ITEMS IN SUPPORT OF HIS GROUNDS OF APPEAL. THESE FIGURES, ON THE FACE OF IT ARE NOT EMERGING FROM THE ANNUAL REPORTS OF THE RESP ECTIVE YEARS; THE APPELLANT HAS SUBMITTED THAT THE FIGURES HAVE BEEN ARRIVED AT AFTER SUBSEQUENT MEMORANDUM OF CHANGE ETC. THE APPELLANT HAS OFFERED THAT IT CAN GET THE FIGURES RECONCILED BEFORE THE AO WHO HAS PASSED THE ASSESSMENT ORDERS UNDER CONSIDERATI ON. IN VIEW OF THIS YOU ARE REQUESTED TO EXAMINE THE FIGURES SHOWN IN THE DETAILS SUBMITTED BY THE APPELLANT ( COPIES ENCLOSED HEREWITH), AFTER EXAMINING THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS OF THE APPELLANT FOR WHICH YOU ARE DULY AU THORISED AND THE APPELLANT HAS BEEN D IRECTED TO PRODUCE THE SAME BEFORE YOU, AND SEND YOUR DETAILED REPORTS KEEPING IN VIEW THE APPEAL ORDER OF THE CIT ( A) KAMAL FOR THE AY. 2002 - 03 IN THE APPELLANT'S OWN CASE. IT WILL BE APPRECIATED IF THE REQUISITE REPORTS FOR BOTH THE A.YS ARE RECEIVED IN THIS OFFICE BY 30.5.2008 TO ENABLE ME TO DISPOSE OFF THE APPEAL. AS MENTIONED ABOVE YOU MAY CALL THE ASSESSEE TO YOUR OFFICE WITH ITS BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS'. ITA NOS. 2950 AND 2951/DEL/2008 ITA NO.528/DEL/2009 HARYANA KSHETRIYA GRAMIN BANK, BHIWANI A.Y. 2003 - 04, 2004 - 05 AND 2005 - 06 6 THE AO, AS PER HIS REMAND REPORT DATED 15.5.2008 SUBMITTED THAT THE FIGURES SUBMITTED BY THE APPELLAN T ARE CORRECT FOR BOTH THE AYS I.E. 2003 - 04 & 2004 - 05. THE AO HAS ALSO CONVEYED THAT THE APPEALS MAY BE DECIDED ON MERITS. 4.2 IN VIEW OF THE REPORT OF THE AO AND THE ORDER OF CIT ( A) KAMAL DATED 20.11.2006 IN THE CASE OF THE APPELLANT HIMSELF FOR THE AY. 2002 - 03, THE ADDITION MADE BY THE AO IS DELETED AND THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL ARE ALLOWED. IT IS PERTINENT TO MENTION HERE THAT THE AR OF THE APPELLANT HAS POINTED OUT DURING APPEAL PROCEEDINGS ON 01.07.2008 THAT THE ORDER OF THE CIT CA) KAMAL DATED 20.11.2006 HAS BEEN CONFIRMED BY THE HON'BLE IT AT DELHI BENCH AND THAT THE DECISION IN THIS REGARD HAS BEEN PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT; I.E. THE APPEAL OF THE DEPARTMENT AGAINST THE ORDER OF CIT CA) HAS BEEN DISMISSED. 5. GROUND OF APPEAL BEARING NOS. 5 PERTAINS TO ADDITION OF RS. 11591500/ - ON ACCOUNT OF IRRECOVERABLE INTEREST. THE APPELLANT HAS SUBMITTED THAT THE AMOUNT IS DEBITED TO THE INTEREST ACCOUNT AND CREDITED TO THE PROVISION FOR BAD AND DOUBTFUL DEBTS AS PER LAW. IT HAS ALSO BEEN SUBMITTED THAT IN TH E SIMILAR CIRCUMSTANCES THE CTT ( A) KAMAL HAS ALLOWED THE CLAIM OF THE APPELLANT ON THE SAME ISSUES. IN VIEW OF THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES, THE ADDITION MADE BY THE AO IS DELETED. 6. GROUND OF APPEAL BEARING NO. 6 PERTAINS TO DISALLOWANCE OF RS. 2,50,000 / - . THE AO HAS DISCUSSED THE ISSUE IN PARA 1 (III) OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. THE APPELLANT HAS SUBMITTED THAT ITS ACCOUNTS ARE AUDITED AND THAT IT CAN NOT SPEND A SINGLE PENNY WITHOUT DUE AUTHORIZATION AND VOUCHERS. IN VIEW OF THE FACTS INVOLVED AND THE REP LY OF THE APPELLANT THE ADDITION MADE BY THE AO IS DELETED. 7. FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2004 - 05 THERE ARE SAME THREE ISSUES INVOLVED IN THE APPEAL OF THE APPELLANT: - (I) ADDITION OF RS. 345.73 LACS ON ACCOUNT OF BAD DEBTS WRITTEN OFF (II) ADDITION OF RS. 3 2554196/ - ON ACCOUNT OF PROVISION FOR BAD AND DOUBTFUL DEBTS AND (III) ADDITION OF RS. 2,50,0001 - ON ACCOUNT OF OTHER EXPENSES. THESE ADDITIONS ARE DELETED ON THE SAME LINES AS FOR THE A.Y. 2003 - 04 AS DISCUSSED ABOVE. 8. IN THE END THE APPEALS ARE ALLOW ED. 6.1 . KEEPING IN VIEW THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES EXPLAINED ABOVE, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT THE LD. FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY HAS DELETED THE ADDITIONS IN DISPUTE ON THE BASIS OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LD.CIT(A) DT, 20.11.2006 IN ASSESS EE S OWN CASE FOR THE A.Y. 2002 - 03 WHICH HAS BEEN CONFIRMED BY THE ITAT DELHI BENCH. THEREFORE, IN OUR CONSIDERED VIEW NO INTERFERENCE IS CALLED FOR IN THE WELL REASONED ORDER PASSED BY THE LD. FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY. WE UPHOLD THE IMPUGNED ORDER ON MERITS ALSO BY DISMISSING THE APPEAL S OF THE REVENUE. ITA NOS. 2950 AND 2951/DEL/2008 ITA NO.528/DEL/2009 HARYANA KSHETRIYA GRAMIN BANK, BHIWANI A.Y. 2003 - 04, 2004 - 05 AND 2005 - 06 7 7. IN VIEW OF THE AFORESAID DISCUSSION , ALL THE THREE APPEALS FILED BY THE REVENUE FOR THE A.Y. 2003 - 04, 2004 - 05 AND 2005 - 06 ARE DISMISSED. 8 . IN THE RESULT ALL THE THREE APPEAL S BY THE REVENUE ARE DISMISSED . ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 20 TH AUGUST, 2015 . SD/ - SD/ - (O.P.KANT) (H.S.SIDHU ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: THE 20 T H AUGUST, 2015 *MANGA COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT; 2.RESPONDE NT; 3.CIT; 4.CIT(A); 5.DR; 6.GUARD FILE BY ORDER ASST. REGISTRAR