<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2005 (11) TMI 251 - HIGH COURT OF DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111029</link>
    <description>Section 12(1) of the SEBI Act was construed on its plain language to require only a certificate of registration from the Board, without tying registration to any particular stock exchange. The Rules and Regulations were treated as prescribing the procedure and conditions for registration, not as creating separate registrations for each exchange. Administrative circulars could not override the statute or enlarge its scope, because subordinate instructions rank below the parent Act and delegated legislation. Applying the literal rule, the Court held that no words could be added to impose multiple registrations. A stock broker operating from several stock exchanges therefore needs only one SEBI registration, and any contrary circular was ineffective to that extent.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 07 Nov 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 19 Apr 2012 18:07:08 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=148045" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (11) TMI 251 - HIGH COURT OF DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111029</link>
      <description>Section 12(1) of the SEBI Act was construed on its plain language to require only a certificate of registration from the Board, without tying registration to any particular stock exchange. The Rules and Regulations were treated as prescribing the procedure and conditions for registration, not as creating separate registrations for each exchange. Administrative circulars could not override the statute or enlarge its scope, because subordinate instructions rank below the parent Act and delegated legislation. Applying the literal rule, the Court held that no words could be added to impose multiple registrations. A stock broker operating from several stock exchanges therefore needs only one SEBI registration, and any contrary circular was ineffective to that extent.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 07 Nov 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111029</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>