Political contribution deductions require genuine transactions; banking records and party registration alone cannot defeat evidence of accommodation e...
Post-death GST liability permits fresh proceedings against legal representatives, while discontinued-business recovery remains limited to the inherite...
Non-confirmation of FEMA seizure prevents adjudicators from overriding pending appellate findings on recorded reasons and suspected foreign asset hold...
AT held that appellants were not 'insiders' under SEBI (PIT) Regulations. The tribunal found no evidence proving appellants' access to unpublished price-sensitive information (UPSI) or trading based on such information. The preponderance of probabilities suggested their trading was consistent with a long-term investment strategy, considering potential positive developments in the company. Consequently, the tribunal negated SEBI's allegations of insider trading, determining that the regulatory burden of proving UPSI access rested with SEBI, which failed to substantiate its claims against the appellants.
AT held that appellants were not 'insiders' under SEBI (PIT) Regulations. The tribunal found no evidence proving appellants' access to unpublished price-sensitive information (UPSI) or trading based on such information. The preponderance of probabilities suggested their trading was consistent with a long-term investment strategy, considering potential positive developments in the company. Consequently, the tribunal negated SEBI's allegations of insider trading, determining that the regulatory burden of proving UPSI access rested with SEBI, which failed to substantiate its claims against the appellants.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
