https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=460753 Section 11B of the SEBI Act could not be used as an independent enforcement source to punish alleged breaches of sections 69, 73(3A) and 77 of the Companies Act, 1956 where the Companies Act supplied the governing framework. The Tribunal held that adjudication had to remain confined to the charges in the show cause notice, and vague references to SEBI Guidelines or prospectus conditions could not expand those charges. It also held that section 55A only authorised SEBI to administer the specified Companies Act provisions within that Act, while section 32 made the SEBI Act supplemental rather than overriding. The impugned prohibition order was therefore without jurisdiction so far as it rested on Companies Act breaches. en-us Fri, 19 Sep 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 15 Feb 2025 12:27:16 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=460753 Section 11B of the SEBI Act could not be used as an independent enforcement source to punish alleged breaches of sections 69, 73(3A) and 77 of the Companies Act, 1956 where the Companies Act supplied the governing framework. The Tribunal held that adjudication had to remain confined to the charges in the show cause notice, and vague references to SEBI Guidelines or prospectus conditions could not expand those charges. It also held that section 55A only authorised SEBI to administer the specified Companies Act provisions within that Act, while section 32 made the SEBI Act supplemental rather than overriding. The impugned prohibition order was therefore without jurisdiction so far as it rested on Companies Act breaches. Case-Laws SEBI Fri, 19 Sep 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=460753