https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=311092 Securities Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai allowed appeals against restraint orders imposed on directors for non-compliance with minimum public shareholding requirements. The tribunal held that preferential allotment of shares to assignee companies to settle loan obligations was legally permissible and these shareholdings could not be clubbed with promoter group holdings. The tribunal found that the company had correctly classified assignee companies' shareholdings as public shareholdings, achieving the mandatory 25% minimum public shareholding under Rule 19(A) of SCRR. Additionally, proceedings against directors were deemed improper as the company itself was not made a party to the proceedings, violating established legal principles requiring action against the company before proceeding against its directors. en-us Wed, 24 Aug 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 07 Dec 2023 18:49:19 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=311092 Securities Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai allowed appeals against restraint orders imposed on directors for non-compliance with minimum public shareholding requirements. The tribunal held that preferential allotment of shares to assignee companies to settle loan obligations was legally permissible and these shareholdings could not be clubbed with promoter group holdings. The tribunal found that the company had correctly classified assignee companies' shareholdings as public shareholdings, achieving the mandatory 25% minimum public shareholding under Rule 19(A) of SCRR. Additionally, proceedings against directors were deemed improper as the company itself was not made a party to the proceedings, violating established legal principles requiring action against the company before proceeding against its directors. Case-Laws SEBI Wed, 24 Aug 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=311092