https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=260979 SEBI's rejection of a consent application was held procedurally unfair because the appellant had sought inspection of documents repeatedly and was not given a meaningful opportunity to review material furnished in stages before the settlement meeting. The belated disclosure made an ex parte disposal unreasonable and prejudicial, and the adjournment request could not be treated as unjustified merely because SEBI considered some material irrelevant. However, the appeal itself was held not maintainable because retrospectively inserted section 15JB(4) imposed a complete bar on appeals from settlement orders, which deprived the Tribunal of jurisdiction despite the earlier merits hearing. en-us Mon, 30 Jun 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 27 Jun 2015 11:36:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=260979 SEBI's rejection of a consent application was held procedurally unfair because the appellant had sought inspection of documents repeatedly and was not given a meaningful opportunity to review material furnished in stages before the settlement meeting. The belated disclosure made an ex parte disposal unreasonable and prejudicial, and the adjournment request could not be treated as unjustified merely because SEBI considered some material irrelevant. However, the appeal itself was held not maintainable because retrospectively inserted section 15JB(4) imposed a complete bar on appeals from settlement orders, which deprived the Tribunal of jurisdiction despite the earlier merits hearing. Case-Laws Companies Law Mon, 30 Jun 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=260979