<?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>2025 (1) TMI 1454 - THE SECURITIES APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AT MUMBAI - LB</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=765389</link>
    <description>The Securities Appellate Tribunal at Mumbai allowed the appeal of a Non-Executive Chairman against SEBI orders. The Tribunal found all allegations baseless, including failure to provide legal advice to Independent Directors, withholding information about an appointment, and issues related to Board meetings and Audit Committee functioning. The Tribunal noted that Independent Directors themselves appointed legal counsel within 8 days of their request, information was provided as instructed, and the Chairman had no direct responsibility for certain committee functions. The SEBI order against the appellant was quashed after the appellant suffered the order for six months without fault.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 11 Dec 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 31 Jan 2025 07:54:27 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=793662" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (1) TMI 1454 - THE SECURITIES APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AT MUMBAI - LB</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=765389</link>
      <description>The Securities Appellate Tribunal at Mumbai allowed the appeal of a Non-Executive Chairman against SEBI orders. The Tribunal found all allegations baseless, including failure to provide legal advice to Independent Directors, withholding information about an appointment, and issues related to Board meetings and Audit Committee functioning. The Tribunal noted that Independent Directors themselves appointed legal counsel within 8 days of their request, information was provided as instructed, and the Chairman had no direct responsibility for certain committee functions. The SEBI order against the appellant was quashed after the appellant suffered the order for six months without fault.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>SEBI</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 11 Dec 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=765389</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>