<?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 (8) TMI 1397 - SECURITIES APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=311074</link>
    <description>Securities Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai dismissed an appeal challenging SEBI&#039;s order for violations of SAST and PIT Regulations. Appellants argued that retransfer of pledged shares would not constitute acquisition, attempting to circumvent takeover regulations. The Tribunal held that parties cannot create pledges contrary to SAST Regulations and that share transfers recorded in demat accounts constitute acquisition regardless of subsequent retransfer arrangements. Penalties of Rs. 10 lakh under various sections were upheld, with the Tribunal finding no grounds to interfere with SEBI&#039;s order despite delay arguments.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 24 Aug 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 07 Dec 2023 06:21:10 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=734140" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2021 (8) TMI 1397 - SECURITIES APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=311074</link>
      <description>Securities Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai dismissed an appeal challenging SEBI&#039;s order for violations of SAST and PIT Regulations. Appellants argued that retransfer of pledged shares would not constitute acquisition, attempting to circumvent takeover regulations. The Tribunal held that parties cannot create pledges contrary to SAST Regulations and that share transfers recorded in demat accounts constitute acquisition regardless of subsequent retransfer arrangements. Penalties of Rs. 10 lakh under various sections were upheld, with the Tribunal finding no grounds to interfere with SEBI&#039;s order despite delay arguments.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>SEBI</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 24 Aug 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=311074</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>