<?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>2021 (5) TMI 1029 - SECURITIES APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=302684</link>
    <description>The appeals by Chromatic India Limited, Vinod Kumar Kaushik, and Ajay Sethi were dismissed, upholding the penalties imposed. However, the appeals by Vipin Sharma were allowed, and the penalties against him were quashed. The Tribunal stressed the significance of evidence in linking directors to fraudulent activities and maintained the principle of proportionality in penalty imposition.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 12 May 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 11 Jun 2022 08:57:47 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=681735" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2021 (5) TMI 1029 - SECURITIES APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=302684</link>
      <description>The appeals by Chromatic India Limited, Vinod Kumar Kaushik, and Ajay Sethi were dismissed, upholding the penalties imposed. However, the appeals by Vipin Sharma were allowed, and the penalties against him were quashed. The Tribunal stressed the significance of evidence in linking directors to fraudulent activities and maintained the principle of proportionality in penalty imposition.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>SEBI</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 12 May 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=302684</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>