https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=237191 The Calcutta HC upheld the SEBI Act provisions defining collective investment schemes, finding them neither vague nor arbitrary under Article 14 because the statutory definition contained workable indicia such as pooling of contributions, use of pooled funds, management on behalf of investors, and absence of day-to-day investor control. Applying a deferential standard for economic legislation, the Court held that breadth of language or possible misuse did not invalidate the scheme. It also upheld the Collective Investment Scheme Regulations, ruling that they supplemented the parent Act, reflected the legislative policy of investor protection, and did not amount to excessive delegation or unreasonable restraint. The writ petition was dismissed. en-us Tue, 23 Jul 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 20 Sep 2013 10:19:31 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=237191 The Calcutta HC upheld the SEBI Act provisions defining collective investment schemes, finding them neither vague nor arbitrary under Article 14 because the statutory definition contained workable indicia such as pooling of contributions, use of pooled funds, management on behalf of investors, and absence of day-to-day investor control. Applying a deferential standard for economic legislation, the Court held that breadth of language or possible misuse did not invalidate the scheme. It also upheld the Collective Investment Scheme Regulations, ruling that they supplemented the parent Act, reflected the legislative policy of investor protection, and did not amount to excessive delegation or unreasonable restraint. The writ petition was dismissed. Case-Laws Companies Law Tue, 23 Jul 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=237191