Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:
TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
By Case ID:

When case Id is present, search is done only for this

Sort By:
RelevanceDefaultDate
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        -

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        <h1>SEBI penalty upheld for investor grievance delays, reduced due to financial constraints. Compliance and accountability emphasized.</h1> <h3>Kanel Industries Ltd. Versus Securities and Exchange Board of India</h3> The court upheld SEBI's imposition of a monetary penalty of Rs. 2,00,000 on a public limited company for delays in redressing investor grievances, despite ... Notice under Rule 4(1) of Adjudication Rules – Proceedings and Penalty u/s 15C and 15A (2) of SEBI Act - Why an enquiry should not be conducted against the company and penalty should not be imposed under sections 15C and 15A(a) of the Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992 – Held that:- The redressal grievance mechanism envisaged under SEBI Act was an important tool in the hands of SEBI to discharge its duties and obligations imposed on it by the Parliament in the SEBI Act, 1992 - Section 11 of the SEBI Act categorically says that one of the most important objects of SEBI was to protect the interest of investors and would, undoubtedly include timely redressal of grievances of investors - There can be no dispute with this proposition of law. The company was a sick industrial company - It had financial constraints - Its inability to appoint a full time company secretary was also evident from the record even fees to the share transfer agent, NSDL and CDSL could not be arranged - these were important factors which should have motivated the Adjudicating Officer to impose a lesser penalty in the matter - Therefore, in the peculiarity of the facts and circumstances of the case, we uphold the order in principle but reduced the said penalty in respect of violation of section 15C and in respect of Section 15A(a) of the SEBI Act - With the modification of penalty, the order was upheld and the appeal was dismissed - However, the appellant shall pay the said amount within two months from the date of receipt of the copy of this order. Issues:1. Delay in redressing grievances of investors.2. Violation of SEBI regulations.3. Imposition of monetary penalty.Analysis:1. The case involved a public limited company that became a sick industrial unit in 2003, with its shares listed on various stock exchanges. The Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) issued a notice to the company in 2010 regarding the delay in redressing grievances of 64 investors. The company responded in 2011, stating that it had resolved the grievances, attributing the delay to staff and infrastructure shortages. SEBI imposed a monetary penalty of Rs. 5,00,000 under Sections 15C and 15A(a) of the SEBI Act after a hearing.2. The appellant argued that it had addressed the investors' grievances before the penalty was imposed, with some complaints related to minor issues like dividends. SEBI contended that the focus was on non-compliance with SEBI's orders within the specified time limit, emphasizing the importance of holding violators accountable. The Adjudicating Officer's order was challenged for allegedly ignoring the company's difficulties in resolving grievances.3. The court acknowledged SEBI's role in protecting investors' interests through grievance redressal mechanisms. While recognizing the company's financial constraints and operational challenges, the court upheld the penalty but reduced it to Rs. 2,00,000 considering the circumstances. The modified penalty of Rs. 2,00,000 was divided equally for violations of Sections 15C and 15A(a) of the SEBI Act. The court dismissed the appeal, directing the company to pay the penalty within two months.This judgment highlights the significance of timely grievance redressal in alignment with SEBI regulations, balancing enforcement with the understanding of operational challenges faced by companies.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found