https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=311115 SEBI examined NSE's non-transparent communication of changes to authorised service providers, preferential treatment to selected brokers, installation of MUX without licence verification, latency advantages, continuation of Sampark connectivity despite licence issues, uneven site inspections, and facilitation of arrangements to regularise unauthorised connectivity. The conduct was described as contrary to SECC Regulations, 2012, SEBI circular requirements, and fair market access principles, and was characterised as collusion and fraud under PFUTP norms. The directions recorded in the text require NSE, W2W and GKN to make deposits to the IPEF, impose market-access and business bans on specified individuals, and restrain Sampark and Prashant D'Souza from offering telecom services to stock exchange entities for two years. en-us Tue, 30 Apr 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 30 Jan 2024 17:37:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=311115 SEBI examined NSE's non-transparent communication of changes to authorised service providers, preferential treatment to selected brokers, installation of MUX without licence verification, latency advantages, continuation of Sampark connectivity despite licence issues, uneven site inspections, and facilitation of arrangements to regularise unauthorised connectivity. The conduct was described as contrary to SECC Regulations, 2012, SEBI circular requirements, and fair market access principles, and was characterised as collusion and fraud under PFUTP norms. The directions recorded in the text require NSE, W2W and GKN to make deposits to the IPEF, impose market-access and business bans on specified individuals, and restrain Sampark and Prashant D'Souza from offering telecom services to stock exchange entities for two years. Case-Laws SEBI Tue, 30 Apr 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=311115