<?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>2008 (5) TMI 716 - SECURITIES APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=275770</link>
    <description>The appeal was allowed, and the impugned order was set aside by the Tribunal. The Tribunal found a violation of the principles of natural justice, as the appellant was not given an opportunity to be heard regarding the disgorgement order. The Tribunal emphasized the necessity of due process and directed that the Board could initiate further proceedings in accordance with the law, ensuring that affected parties are afforded an opportunity to present their case. The decision highlighted concerns over the Board&#039;s handling of proceedings against depositories and participants, while financiers, deemed ultimate beneficiaries, were overlooked.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 02 May 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 13 Dec 2023 10:44:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=538535" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (5) TMI 716 - SECURITIES APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=275770</link>
      <description>The appeal was allowed, and the impugned order was set aside by the Tribunal. The Tribunal found a violation of the principles of natural justice, as the appellant was not given an opportunity to be heard regarding the disgorgement order. The Tribunal emphasized the necessity of due process and directed that the Board could initiate further proceedings in accordance with the law, ensuring that affected parties are afforded an opportunity to present their case. The decision highlighted concerns over the Board&#039;s handling of proceedings against depositories and participants, while financiers, deemed ultimate beneficiaries, were overlooked.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 02 May 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=275770</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>