<?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>2015 (4) TMI 233 - SECURITIES APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=258351</link>
    <description>The tribunal ruled in favor of the appellants, finding that the obligation to disclose &quot;otherwise encumbered&quot; shares was not clearly mandated by SEBI regulations or the Listing Agreement. The tribunal criticized SEBI for requiring disclosure beyond the scope of pledged shares and noted inconsistencies in SEBI&#039;s adjudication process. The penalties imposed on the appellants were set aside, and both appeals were allowed with no costs awarded.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 30 Oct 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 02 Jan 2016 10:19:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=380966" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (4) TMI 233 - SECURITIES APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=258351</link>
      <description>The tribunal ruled in favor of the appellants, finding that the obligation to disclose &quot;otherwise encumbered&quot; shares was not clearly mandated by SEBI regulations or the Listing Agreement. The tribunal criticized SEBI for requiring disclosure beyond the scope of pledged shares and noted inconsistencies in SEBI&#039;s adjudication process. The penalties imposed on the appellants were set aside, and both appeals were allowed with no costs awarded.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 30 Oct 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=258351</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>