https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=461216 The Securities Appellate Tribunal Mumbai held that it had jurisdiction to entertain an appeal by a liquidator against BSE's refusal to defreeze shares, despite the company being under liquidation. The Tribunal found that freezing the demat account for non-compliance with LODR Regulation 33 was unrelated to the insolvency process under IBC. Since the company entered liquidation before securities suspension, subsequent SEBI actions contravened IBC Section 52. The Tribunal quashed the impugned communication, allowed the appeal, and directed respondents to defreeze the demat account within two weeks, permitting the liquidator to sell the shares. en-us Tue, 29 Aug 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 21 Mar 2025 19:21:38 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=461216 The Securities Appellate Tribunal Mumbai held that it had jurisdiction to entertain an appeal by a liquidator against BSE's refusal to defreeze shares, despite the company being under liquidation. The Tribunal found that freezing the demat account for non-compliance with LODR Regulation 33 was unrelated to the insolvency process under IBC. Since the company entered liquidation before securities suspension, subsequent SEBI actions contravened IBC Section 52. The Tribunal quashed the impugned communication, allowed the appeal, and directed respondents to defreeze the demat account within two weeks, permitting the liquidator to sell the shares. Case-Laws SEBI Tue, 29 Aug 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=461216