PMLA anticipatory bail requires satisfaction of twin conditions, while predicate-offence protection does not extend to independent money-laundering pr...
School-affiliation charges remain taxable where not directly connected with examinations, while extended limitation requires proof of deliberate tax e...
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 The tribunal found no evidence proving appellants' access to unpublished price-sensitive information (UPSI) or trading based on such information.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 The tribunal found no evidence proving appellants' access to unpublished price-sensitive information (UPSI) or trading based on such information.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 
of 4827 
Join Channel 
