<?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>2012 (7) TMI 1053 - SECURITIES APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=197437</link>
    <description>The Tribunal set aside the SEBI&#039;s order prohibiting the appellant from accessing the securities market for 2 years. It found that the appellant&#039;s role as a financier did not involve manipulative trades and did not violate the FUTP Regulations. The Tribunal concluded that the appellant&#039;s actions of providing a loan and retaining shares as security did not indicate any fraudulent or manipulative practices, lifting the prohibition on the appellant.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 16 Jul 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 06 Jan 2018 14:22:16 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=503404" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (7) TMI 1053 - SECURITIES APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=197437</link>
      <description>The Tribunal set aside the SEBI&#039;s order prohibiting the appellant from accessing the securities market for 2 years. It found that the appellant&#039;s role as a financier did not involve manipulative trades and did not violate the FUTP Regulations. The Tribunal concluded that the appellant&#039;s actions of providing a loan and retaining shares as security did not indicate any fraudulent or manipulative practices, lifting the prohibition on the appellant.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 16 Jul 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=197437</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>