We've upgraded AI Search on TaxTMI with two powerful modes:
1. Basic • Quick overview summary answering your query with references• Category-wise results to explore all relevant documents on TaxTMI
2. Advanced • Includes everything in Basic • Detailed report covering: - Overview Summary - Governing Provisions [Acts, Notifications, Circulars] - Relevant Case Laws - Tariff / Classification / HSN - Expert views from TaxTMI - Practical Guidance with immediate steps and dispute strategy
• Also highlights how each document is relevant to your query, helping you quickly understand key insights without reading the full text.Help Us Improve - by giving the rating with each AI Result:
Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.
Provisions expressly mentioned in the judgment/order text.
<h1>Appeal dismissed; Rs. 4,00,000 penalty for violating SEBI (Prohibition of Insider Trading) Regulations, 1992 upheld</h1> SC dismissed the appeal and upheld the Whole Time Member, SEBI's order imposing a Rs. 4,00,000 penalty for violation of the SEBI (Prohibition of Insider ... Condonation of delay - Acquisition of shares - imposition of penalty - delay in issuance of the show cause notice (laches) - violation of the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Prohibition of Insider Trading) Regulations, 1992 - HELD THAT:- We do not find any good ground and reason to interfere with the impugned judgment, which confirms the order passed by the Whole Time Member, Securities and Exchange Board of India imposing a penalty of Rs. 4,00,000/- (Rupees four lakhs only) for the violation of the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Prohibition of Insider Trading) Regulations, 1992. Recording the aforesaid, the appeal is dismissed. 'Delay condoned.' The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal and declined interference with the impugned judgment that had confirmed a penalty of Rs. 4,00,000/- imposed by the Whole Time Member, Securities and Exchange Board of India. The penalty was for violation of the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Prohibition of Insider Trading) Regulations, 1992. The Court stated that it did 'not find any good ground and reason to interfere' with the confirmation of the penalty. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed and pending applications, if any, were directed to stand disposed of. No counsel appeared for the respondent at the hearing.
TaxTMI 
• Category-wise results to explore all relevant documents on TaxTMI
Help Us Improve - by giving the rating with each AI Result:
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
