TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Penalty upheld under SEBI Act Section 15A(b) for failure to disclose share purchases under PIT Regulations 13(4), 13(4A), 13(5)</h1> The SAT upheld the penalty imposed under section 15A(b) of the SEBI Act for failure to make mandatory disclosures to the stock exchange regarding share ... Imposition of penalty u/s 15A(b) - appellant failed to make mandatory disclosures to the stock exchange regarding share purchases - violation of the provisions of Regulation 13(4) and 13(4A) read with Regulation 13(5) of Securities and Exchange Board of India (Prohibition of Insider Trading) Regulations, 1992 (PIT Regulations) - HELD THAT:- This case is similar to the case of Mr. Ankur Chaturvedi who has filed Appeal [2015 (10) TMI 267 - SECURITIES APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI]. Both the appellant and Mr. Ankur Chaturvedi are promoter/director of the very same company. In fact this appeal was heard along with the Appeal no .434 of 2014 and the said appeal is dismissed by us today. Accordingly for the reasons stated in our decision in Appeal [2015 (10) TMI 267 - SECURITIES APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI] , we uphold the penalty imposed under section 15A(b) of the SEBI Act. Appeal is dismissed in the above terms with no order as to costs. The Securities Appellate Tribunal (SAT), Mumbai, upheld a penalty of Rs. 5 lakh imposed under section 15A(b) of the SEBI Act, 1992 on the appellant, a promoter/director of Brijlaxmi Leasing and Finance Company Ltd, for violating Regulation 13(4), 13(4A) read with 13(5) of the SEBI (Prohibition of Insider Trading) Regulations, 1992. The appellant failed to make mandatory disclosures to the stock exchange regarding share purchases on 8-Oct-12, 19-Dec-12, and 20-Dec-12. The Tribunal noted the similarity with Appeal no. 434 of 2014 involving another promoter/director of the same company, which was dismissed. Relying on the reasoning in that appeal, the Tribunal 'uphold[ed] the penalty imposed under section 15A(b) of the SEBI Act.' The appeal was dismissed with no order as to costs.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
