https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=300040 Preferential allotment did not exempt an acquirer from the disclosure obligation under Regulation 7 of the SEBI takeover regulations; once the 5% threshold was crossed, disclosure to the target company remained mandatory. Entities under common control were treated as persons acting in concert, so their acquisitions were aggregated for disclosure and open-offer obligations. Shares transferred into the appellant's name and credited in its demat account made it the beneficial owner, and an unproven security or trust arrangement did not displace liability. Repeated breaches at different trigger points constituted distinct violations, permitting separate penalties. en-us Tue, 09 Jan 2007 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 10 Jan 2022 11:19:08 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=300040 Preferential allotment did not exempt an acquirer from the disclosure obligation under Regulation 7 of the SEBI takeover regulations; once the 5% threshold was crossed, disclosure to the target company remained mandatory. Entities under common control were treated as persons acting in concert, so their acquisitions were aggregated for disclosure and open-offer obligations. Shares transferred into the appellant's name and credited in its demat account made it the beneficial owner, and an unproven security or trust arrangement did not displace liability. Repeated breaches at different trigger points constituted distinct violations, permitting separate penalties. Case-Laws SEBI Tue, 09 Jan 2007 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=300040