<?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>2013 (3) TMI 431 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=221665</link>
    <description>The Supreme Court upheld the Securities Appellate Tribunal&#039;s decision that the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) could request audited annual accounts beyond the stipulated period for Credit Rating Agency (CRA) registration. However, the Court found SEBI&#039;s extension of the compliance time improper. The respondent&#039;s compliance with providing audited accounts for the relevant period was deemed satisfactory, and SEBI was directed to reconsider the CRA registration application without requiring additional accounts for subsequent years. The appeal was dismissed, and the respondent&#039;s application was to be reconsidered by SEBI.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 19 Feb 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 23 Mar 2013 22:50:31 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=195017" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (3) TMI 431 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=221665</link>
      <description>The Supreme Court upheld the Securities Appellate Tribunal&#039;s decision that the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) could request audited annual accounts beyond the stipulated period for Credit Rating Agency (CRA) registration. However, the Court found SEBI&#039;s extension of the compliance time improper. The respondent&#039;s compliance with providing audited accounts for the relevant period was deemed satisfactory, and SEBI was directed to reconsider the CRA registration application without requiring additional accounts for subsequent years. The appeal was dismissed, and the respondent&#039;s application was to be reconsidered by SEBI.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 19 Feb 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=221665</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>