https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=346482 An appellate penalty cannot be sustained where the tribunal has not recorded an independent finding that the respondent himself engaged in front running. The Supreme Court noted that the finding of front running was recorded against other noticees, while the respondent was only described as having aided and abetted the transactions. In an appeal from the adjudicating authority, the Appellate Tribunal was required to reach its own conclusion before affirming penalty, and the merger argument was rejected. The penalty order was therefore unsustainable and the matter had to be considered afresh by the Appellate Tribunal. en-us Wed, 05 Apr 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 17 Aug 2017 08:41:22 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=346482 An appellate penalty cannot be sustained where the tribunal has not recorded an independent finding that the respondent himself engaged in front running. The Supreme Court noted that the finding of front running was recorded against other noticees, while the respondent was only described as having aided and abetted the transactions. In an appeal from the adjudicating authority, the Appellate Tribunal was required to reach its own conclusion before affirming penalty, and the merger argument was rejected. The penalty order was therefore unsustainable and the matter had to be considered afresh by the Appellate Tribunal. Case-Laws Companies Law Wed, 05 Apr 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=346482