<?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>2011 (12) TMI 730 - SECURITIES APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=283348</link>
    <description>A director and connected person who purchased company shares before the contract award was publicly disseminated was held to have traded while in possession of unpublished price sensitive information. The information that the tender process had reached its final stage, with only the award remaining, was not public to ordinary shareholders, and dissemination occurred only later. On those facts, the insider trading prohibition was breached because the decisive question was whether the trader had unpublished price sensitive information at the time of dealing. The finding of violation was upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 16 Dec 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 20 Sep 2019 12:00:56 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=588016" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (12) TMI 730 - SECURITIES APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=283348</link>
      <description>A director and connected person who purchased company shares before the contract award was publicly disseminated was held to have traded while in possession of unpublished price sensitive information. The information that the tender process had reached its final stage, with only the award remaining, was not public to ordinary shareholders, and dissemination occurred only later. On those facts, the insider trading prohibition was breached because the decisive question was whether the trader had unpublished price sensitive information at the time of dealing. The finding of violation was upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>SEBI</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 16 Dec 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=283348</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>