Fair market value under section 50C must reflect existing property condition, not hypothetical development, and statutory valuation steps must be foll...
The Tribunal held that the statutory promoter-group test under the ICDR Regulations could not be displaced by a pleaded family arrangement; on the admitted shareholding and control findings, the relevant entities were counted in the promoter group, causing public shareholding to fall below the prescribed minimum and resulting in breach of minimum public shareholding norms. It further found, on preponderance of probability, that trading in an illiquid scrip through connected persons, with concentrated inter se trades around the delisting exercise, showed an artificial attempt to project liquidity and facilitate delisting, so the fraudulent trading finding was affirmed. Debarment was reduced only for specified appellants on proportionality grounds.
The Tribunal held that the statutory promoter-group test under the ICDR Regulations could not be displaced by a pleaded family arrangement; on the admitted shareholding and control findings, the relevant entities were counted in the promoter group, causing public shareholding to fall below the prescribed minimum and resulting in breach of minimum public shareholding norms. It further found, on preponderance of probability, that trading in an illiquid scrip through connected persons, with concentrated inter se trades around the delisting exercise, showed an artificial attempt to project liquidity and facilitate delisting, so the fraudulent trading finding was affirmed. Debarment was reduced only for specified appellants on proportionality grounds.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4823 
Join Channel 
