<?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>2019 (10) TMI 1052 - SECURITIES APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=387568</link>
    <description>A representation filed pursuant to a limited tribunal direction cannot be used to expand the scope of the original appeal beyond the grievances set out in the memo of appeal. The tribunal noted that the modification request had already been rejected because enlarging the representation would impermissibly widen the proceedings, and a later affidavit filed after disposal of the appeal and modification application could not be treated as part of the appeal record. The grievance concerning penalties on key managerial personnel was also rendered academic because parallel proceedings had already imposed penalties on them. The challenge to rejection of the representation therefore failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 07 Aug 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 25 Oct 2019 14:43:53 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=592146" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (10) TMI 1052 - SECURITIES APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=387568</link>
      <description>A representation filed pursuant to a limited tribunal direction cannot be used to expand the scope of the original appeal beyond the grievances set out in the memo of appeal. The tribunal noted that the modification request had already been rejected because enlarging the representation would impermissibly widen the proceedings, and a later affidavit filed after disposal of the appeal and modification application could not be treated as part of the appeal record. The grievance concerning penalties on key managerial personnel was also rendered academic because parallel proceedings had already imposed penalties on them. The challenge to rejection of the representation therefore failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>SEBI</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 07 Aug 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=387568</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>