<?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 (3) TMI 1145 - SECURITIES APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=767759</link>
    <description>The Securities Appellate Tribunal at Mumbai upheld SEBI&#039;s penalty against an investment advisory firm for multiple regulatory violations. The tribunal found the firm guilty of 9 out of 13 alleged violations including KYC non-compliance, inadequate risk profiling, failure to conduct suitability assessments, improper disclosure practices, and charging excessive fees. The tribunal rejected the firm&#039;s challenges regarding procedural delays, double jeopardy, and natural justice denial. However, considering some violations were not established, the tribunal reduced the penalty from Rs. 1 crore to Rs. 70 lakhs, emphasizing the need to protect market integrity and investor interests.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 05 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 25 Mar 2025 08:48:17 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=808838" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (3) TMI 1145 - SECURITIES APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=767759</link>
      <description>The Securities Appellate Tribunal at Mumbai upheld SEBI&#039;s penalty against an investment advisory firm for multiple regulatory violations. The tribunal found the firm guilty of 9 out of 13 alleged violations including KYC non-compliance, inadequate risk profiling, failure to conduct suitability assessments, improper disclosure practices, and charging excessive fees. The tribunal rejected the firm&#039;s challenges regarding procedural delays, double jeopardy, and natural justice denial. However, considering some violations were not established, the tribunal reduced the penalty from Rs. 1 crore to Rs. 70 lakhs, emphasizing the need to protect market integrity and investor interests.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>SEBI</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 05 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=767759</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>