https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=331584 IPO proceeds diverted to a group company, contrary to the stated object in the offer document, and the non-disclosure of the resolution authorising that use were treated as material suppression. The tribunal held that the concealment, coupled with the timing and manner of transfer, amounted to breach of disclosure obligations under the issue regulations and to use of manipulative and deceptive devices under the fraud provisions, so the related penalties were sustained. It also upheld the penalty for breach of Clause 49 because the Audit Committee was chaired by a Whole Time Director instead of an Independent Director. However, the separate penalty based on alleged circuitous routing of funds to trading clients was deleted for lack of reliable proof. en-us Tue, 26 Jul 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 27 Aug 2016 13:01:11 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=331584 IPO proceeds diverted to a group company, contrary to the stated object in the offer document, and the non-disclosure of the resolution authorising that use were treated as material suppression. The tribunal held that the concealment, coupled with the timing and manner of transfer, amounted to breach of disclosure obligations under the issue regulations and to use of manipulative and deceptive devices under the fraud provisions, so the related penalties were sustained. It also upheld the penalty for breach of Clause 49 because the Audit Committee was chaired by a Whole Time Director instead of an Independent Director. However, the separate penalty based on alleged circuitous routing of funds to trading clients was deleted for lack of reliable proof. Case-Laws Companies Law Tue, 26 Jul 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=331584