https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=376864 Self-trades in algorithmic trading are not automatically manipulative under the PFUTP framework; liability depends on whether the trades, viewed in the totality of circumstances, created a false or misleading market appearance with supporting evidence of intent or manipulation. The tribunal noted that self-trade volume is only one factor and that the incorrect reliance on an exaggerated percentage materially affected the adjudication. It also held that adequate hearing had been given, so the natural justice objection failed. Because the order rested on an erroneous factual basis, the penalty was set aside and the matter remitted for fresh adjudication on the correct record. en-us Tue, 26 Feb 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 18 Mar 2019 08:50:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=376864 Self-trades in algorithmic trading are not automatically manipulative under the PFUTP framework; liability depends on whether the trades, viewed in the totality of circumstances, created a false or misleading market appearance with supporting evidence of intent or manipulation. The tribunal noted that self-trade volume is only one factor and that the incorrect reliance on an exaggerated percentage materially affected the adjudication. It also held that adequate hearing had been given, so the natural justice objection failed. Because the order rested on an erroneous factual basis, the penalty was set aside and the matter remitted for fresh adjudication on the correct record. Case-Laws SEBI Tue, 26 Feb 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=376864