Penalty on exchange vacated for lack of evidence that exchange authorized subsidiaries' investments; Regulations 43(1) 2012 and 38(2) 2018 inapplicabl...
Petitioner not an eligible assessee under s.144C(15)(b); draft and final assessments under s.144C(1)/s.143(3)/s.144B quashed and penalty show-cause no...
The HC dismissed the appeal and refused to interdict the impugned order dated 24.12.2024, upholding the CPIO's denial under Section 8(1)(h) of the RTI Act. The court held that disclosure of information relating to examination or investigation of alleged insider trading is exempt as it could impede evidence collection, compromise confidentiality, cause unwarranted market speculation and harm third parties. The First Appellate Authority's finding-that inputs/alerts may not culminate in enforcement and that only complaint status is publicly available on the SCORES portal-was endorsed. Consequently, there was no deficiency in the original response and no obligation to furnish the speaking order or further investigatory details.
The HC dismissed the appeal and refused to interdict the impugned order dated 24.12.2024, upholding the CPIO's denial under Section 8(1)(h) of the RTI Act. The court held that disclosure of information relating to examination or investigation of alleged insider trading is exempt as it could impede evidence collection, compromise confidentiality, cause unwarranted market speculation and harm third parties. The First Appellate Authority's finding-that inputs/alerts may not culminate in enforcement and that only complaint status is publicly available on the SCORES portal-was endorsed. Consequently, there was no deficiency in the original response and no obligation to furnish the speaking order or further investigatory details.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
