https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=386625 Information that a company was the lowest bidder and that its bids were under consideration was unpublished price sensitive information because it had not been announced by the company or its agent and was likely to materially affect share price; trading on that basis amounted to insider trading, so the insider-trading penalty was maintained. A penalty for allegedly giving misleading information about relationships with connected entities was not sustainable because the regulator's query was not clear enough to require disclosure of professional or working relationships, so that penalty was set aside. Non-disclosure of pledged shares could not be fastened on persons who were neither promoters nor part of the promoter group, so the takeover-regulation penalty was quashed. The quantum of penalty and joint and several liability were upheld only for the insider-trading violation. en-us Fri, 12 Jul 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 03 Oct 2019 13:16:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=386625 Information that a company was the lowest bidder and that its bids were under consideration was unpublished price sensitive information because it had not been announced by the company or its agent and was likely to materially affect share price; trading on that basis amounted to insider trading, so the insider-trading penalty was maintained. A penalty for allegedly giving misleading information about relationships with connected entities was not sustainable because the regulator's query was not clear enough to require disclosure of professional or working relationships, so that penalty was set aside. Non-disclosure of pledged shares could not be fastened on persons who were neither promoters nor part of the promoter group, so the takeover-regulation penalty was quashed. The quantum of penalty and joint and several liability were upheld only for the insider-trading violation. Case-Laws SEBI Fri, 12 Jul 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=386625