<?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>2020 (2) TMI 871 - SECURITIES APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=392427</link>
    <description>The appeal against the Directors of a company was initially dismissed but later restored for one appellant. The case involved ex-parte interim orders restraining directors from market access due to alleged contravention of various laws. An independent director argued lack of involvement in the company&#039;s affairs during the issuance of debentures, with the Tribunal ultimately finding him not liable for refund based on his non-involvement in the decision-making process. The Tribunal emphasized the need for specific findings of involvement or responsibility for liability, quashing the order holding the appellant liable for refund due to lack of evidence of his involvement during the relevant period.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 27 Nov 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 20 Feb 2020 11:27:23 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=604569" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (2) TMI 871 - SECURITIES APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=392427</link>
      <description>The appeal against the Directors of a company was initially dismissed but later restored for one appellant. The case involved ex-parte interim orders restraining directors from market access due to alleged contravention of various laws. An independent director argued lack of involvement in the company&#039;s affairs during the issuance of debentures, with the Tribunal ultimately finding him not liable for refund based on his non-involvement in the decision-making process. The Tribunal emphasized the need for specific findings of involvement or responsibility for liability, quashing the order holding the appellant liable for refund due to lack of evidence of his involvement during the relevant period.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>SEBI</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 27 Nov 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=392427</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>