<?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>2014 (2) TMI 1406 - SECURITIES APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=301209</link>
    <description>Evidence of inter se share transfers, common addresses, shared directors, funding links and ledger entries established that the promoter, Yadav and Silvassa entities acted in concert and were not independent in substance; liability for fraudulent misrepresentation and takeover disclosure breaches was therefore sustained. For summons non-compliance, wilful default was not made out where service was delayed or a reasonable adjournment request was pending, so penalties were set aside in some matters and upheld in others depending on opportunity and response. Penalties against the Tayal group entities and directors were maintained only where the record showed specific involvement, and were reduced or set aside where the adjudication lacked a cogent factual basis or the appellant&#039;s role was not individually established.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 11 Feb 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 21 Mar 2022 08:12:05 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=673332" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (2) TMI 1406 - SECURITIES APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=301209</link>
      <description>Evidence of inter se share transfers, common addresses, shared directors, funding links and ledger entries established that the promoter, Yadav and Silvassa entities acted in concert and were not independent in substance; liability for fraudulent misrepresentation and takeover disclosure breaches was therefore sustained. For summons non-compliance, wilful default was not made out where service was delayed or a reasonable adjournment request was pending, so penalties were set aside in some matters and upheld in others depending on opportunity and response. Penalties against the Tayal group entities and directors were maintained only where the record showed specific involvement, and were reduced or set aside where the adjudication lacked a cogent factual basis or the appellant&#039;s role was not individually established.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>SEBI</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 11 Feb 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=301209</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>