https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=285589 The Tribunal upheld the adjudicating officer's findings that the appellants violated Regulation 7 by failing to disclose reacquired shares and Regulation 11(1) by not making a public announcement upon exceeding the threshold limit. Each appellant was fined Rs. 3 lacs, Rs. 2 lacs for Regulation 11(1) breach and Rs. 1 lac for Regulation 7 violation. The argument that shares were collateral security was rejected, affirming the banks' beneficial ownership upon pledge invocation. Appeals were dismissed without costs. en-us Fri, 11 Mar 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 18 Jan 2020 10:15:19 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=285589 The Tribunal upheld the adjudicating officer's findings that the appellants violated Regulation 7 by failing to disclose reacquired shares and Regulation 11(1) by not making a public announcement upon exceeding the threshold limit. Each appellant was fined Rs. 3 lacs, Rs. 2 lacs for Regulation 11(1) breach and Rs. 1 lac for Regulation 7 violation. The argument that shares were collateral security was rejected, affirming the banks' beneficial ownership upon pledge invocation. Appeals were dismissed without costs. Case-Laws SEBI Fri, 11 Mar 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=285589