<?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>2022 (10) TMI 1216 - SECURITIES APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI (LB)</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=311120</link>
    <description>Securities Appellate Tribunal Mumbai set aside SEBI&#039;s action against chartered accountants who issued unqualified utilization certificates for IPO proceeds that were used for purposes other than those stated in the prospectus. The Tribunal held that while the CAs falsely certified the utilization certificate, there was no finding of fraud, manipulation, collusion, or deceit. The CAs had qualified the annual accounts regarding fund utilization, which was publicly disclosed. The Tribunal ruled this constituted professional negligence, not securities fraud, making ICAI the appropriate authority for disciplinary action rather than SEBI.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 12 Oct 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 09 Dec 2023 08:56:21 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=734564" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (10) TMI 1216 - SECURITIES APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI (LB)</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=311120</link>
      <description>Securities Appellate Tribunal Mumbai set aside SEBI&#039;s action against chartered accountants who issued unqualified utilization certificates for IPO proceeds that were used for purposes other than those stated in the prospectus. The Tribunal held that while the CAs falsely certified the utilization certificate, there was no finding of fraud, manipulation, collusion, or deceit. The CAs had qualified the annual accounts regarding fund utilization, which was publicly disclosed. The Tribunal ruled this constituted professional negligence, not securities fraud, making ICAI the appropriate authority for disciplinary action rather than SEBI.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>SEBI</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 12 Oct 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=311120</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>