<?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>2014 (1) TMI 1956 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=459232</link>
    <description>Delhi HC upheld SEBI&#039;s conviction of company and directors for operating collective investment scheme without registration. Directors S.P. Kalia, Brijinder Makkar, and Manoj Kapur were held vicariously liable under Section 24 read with Section 27(1) as they were in-charge of business operations and failed to prove due diligence. Director Smt. Sudha Mittal was acquitted as prosecution failed to establish her active involvement beyond being a housewife-director. Shalender Kaushik was acquitted as he was never a director and mere subscription to company documents insufficient for liability. Court maintained original sentences emphasizing deterrent effect against misleading investors.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 20 Jan 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 05 Dec 2024 21:12:26 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=781107" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (1) TMI 1956 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=459232</link>
      <description>Delhi HC upheld SEBI&#039;s conviction of company and directors for operating collective investment scheme without registration. Directors S.P. Kalia, Brijinder Makkar, and Manoj Kapur were held vicariously liable under Section 24 read with Section 27(1) as they were in-charge of business operations and failed to prove due diligence. Director Smt. Sudha Mittal was acquitted as prosecution failed to establish her active involvement beyond being a housewife-director. Shalender Kaushik was acquitted as he was never a director and mere subscription to company documents insufficient for liability. Court maintained original sentences emphasizing deterrent effect against misleading investors.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>SEBI</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 20 Jan 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=459232</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>