https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=460114 A direction under Section 11B restraining a person from accessing the capital market or dealing in securities is a permissible regulatory measure and is not invalid merely because it has a disabling effect. The Tribunal had wrongly treated the restraint as a penalty beyond Section 11B, but that view could not stand in light of SEBI v. Ajay Agarwal, which had already settled the legal character of such directions. The restraint order was therefore not impermissible as a penal consequence. en-us Tue, 05 Mar 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 11 Jan 2025 21:42:11 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=460114 A direction under Section 11B restraining a person from accessing the capital market or dealing in securities is a permissible regulatory measure and is not invalid merely because it has a disabling effect. The Tribunal had wrongly treated the restraint as a penalty beyond Section 11B, but that view could not stand in light of SEBI v. Ajay Agarwal, which had already settled the legal character of such directions. The restraint order was therefore not impermissible as a penal consequence. Case-Laws SEBI Tue, 05 Mar 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=460114