<?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>2012 (7) TMI 1145 - SECURITIES APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=303279</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the violation of Regulation 11(1) and 14(1) of the Takeover Code, requiring an open offer due to the appellant&#039;s increase in shareholding triggering the regulations. The penalty imposed under Section 15H of the Act was reduced from Rs. 1.87 crore to Rs. 10 lakh, considering mitigating factors and the absence of actual loss to investors.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 25 Jul 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 14 Jul 2022 10:34:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=684790" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (7) TMI 1145 - SECURITIES APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=303279</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the violation of Regulation 11(1) and 14(1) of the Takeover Code, requiring an open offer due to the appellant&#039;s increase in shareholding triggering the regulations. The penalty imposed under Section 15H of the Act was reduced from Rs. 1.87 crore to Rs. 10 lakh, considering mitigating factors and the absence of actual loss to investors.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>SEBI</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 25 Jul 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=303279</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>