Just a moment...

Top
FeedbackReport
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Feedback/Report an Error
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.
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: ?
Even if Sort by Date is selected, exact match will be shown on the top.
RelevanceDate
    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
      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

        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>NSE fined Rs 62.58 crores for giving preferential dark fiber connectivity to select brokers violating PFUTP Regulations 2003</h1> <h3>In Re : National Stock Exchange Ltd. (NSE), Mr. Umesh Jain, CTO, NSE, Ms. Chitra Ramakrishna, MD and CEO of NSE, Mr. Subramanian Anand, Group Operating Officer (GOO) & Advisor to MD of NSE, Mr. Ravi Varanasi, Head of Business Development Function, Mr. Nagendra Kumar SRVS (NSE–Head of Membership Department), and other</h3> In Re : National Stock Exchange Ltd. (NSE), Mr. Umesh Jain, CTO, NSE, Ms. Chitra Ramakrishna, MD and CEO of NSE, Mr. Subramanian Anand, Group Operating ... Issues Involved:1. Non-transparent communication by NSE regarding changes to authorized service providers.2. Preferential treatment of certain stock brokers by NSE.3. Installation of MUX in NSE MMR without verifying licenses.4. Latency advantage to W2W.5. Continuation of Sampark connectivity by W2W and GKN.6. Site inspection conducted for some brokers but not for W2W and GKN.7. Arrangements facilitated by NSE between Sampark and Reliance.8. Violations of SECC Regulations, 2012 and SEBI Circulars.9. Collusion and fraud under PFUTP Regulations, 2003.Issue-Wise Detailed Analysis:1. Non-transparent Communication by NSE:NSE amended its Circular dated August 31, 2009, through a website publication in October 2013, without issuing a formal circular or referring to the original circular. This led to confusion among brokers and even NSE's Colo support team was unaware of the changes. This mode of communication violated the principles of transparency and consistency, thereby breaching regulation 41 (2) of SECC Regulations, 2012, and Clause 3 of SEBI Circular CIR/MRD/DP/07/2015 dated May 13, 2015.2. Preferential Treatment of Certain Stock Brokers by NSE:NSE allowed W2W and GKN to establish P2P connectivity through Sampark, an unauthorized service provider, while denying similar requests from other brokers like Millennium and Mansukh. This discriminatory approach violated regulation 41 (2) of SECC Regulations, 2012, and Clause 3 of SEBI Circular CIR/MRD/DP/07/2015 dated May 13, 2015. NSE's actions were inconsistent and unfair, leading to allegations of preferential treatment.3. Installation of MUX in NSE MMR without Verifying Licenses:NSE permitted Sampark to install its MUX in NSE MMR without verifying its license, contrary to its policy. This lack of due diligence allowed an ineligible entity to provide services, violating SECC Regulations, 2012, and SEBI Circulars.4. Latency Advantage to W2W:W2W arranged its cabling in the NSE Colo rack to gain lower latency compared to other brokers. This was supported by internal emails and statements. NSE failed to monitor and ensure fair access, resulting in a latency advantage for W2W, violating principles of fairness and equity.5. Continuation of Sampark Connectivity by W2W and GKN:Despite discovering that Sampark lacked the requisite license, NSE allowed W2W and GKN to continue using Sampark's services. This decision was taken to avoid disruption, but it perpetuated the preferential treatment and violated SECC Regulations, 2012, and SEBI Circulars.6. Site Inspection Conducted for Some Brokers but not for W2W and GKN:NSE conducted site inspections for brokers like Millennium, GRD, and SMC but waived this requirement for W2W and GKN. This inconsistent approach indicated preferential treatment and violated principles of fairness and transparency.7. Arrangements Facilitated by NSE between Sampark and Reliance:NSE facilitated the arrangement between Sampark and Reliance to regularize Sampark's unauthorized connectivity. This action was seen as an attempt to legitimize an unauthorized activity, violating SECC Regulations, 2012, and SEBI Circulars.8. Violations of SECC Regulations, 2012, and SEBI Circulars:NSE's actions, including non-transparent communication, preferential treatment, and failure to verify licenses, violated various provisions of SECC Regulations, 2012, SEBI Circulars, and recommendations of SMAC.9. Collusion and Fraud under PFUTP Regulations, 2003:NSE, W2W, GKN, and Sampark were found to have engaged in collusion and fraudulent activities. Their actions, including unauthorized connectivity and preferential treatment, amounted to fraudulent and unfair trade practices, violating Section 12A(c) of the SEBI Act, 1992, and PFUTP Regulations, 2003.Conclusion and Directions:- NSE is directed to deposit Rs. 62.58 Crores to the IPEF of SEBI and undertake various corrective measures.- W2W and GKN are directed to deposit Rs. 15.34 Crores and Rs. 4.9 Crores, respectively, to the IPEF of SEBI.- Chitra Ramakrishna, Subramanian Anand, Ravi Varanasi, Nagendra Kumar, and Deviprasad Singh are barred from holding positions in stock exchanges and related entities for specified periods.- Sampark and Prashant D’Souza are barred from offering telecom services to stock exchanges and related entities for two years.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found