https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=463624 Repeated small-quantity trades by connected entities, assessed on a preponderance of probabilities, were treated as sufficient to infer a coordinated scheme to create a misleading appearance of trading and influence the scrip price under the PFUTP Regulations. Direct and indirect links, including common directorship, address, email ID and off-market transfers, supported the finding against Noticees 1 to 4, 6, 7 and 9, while isolated trades by other noticees were not enough to fix liability. Once fraudulent and unfair trade practice was established, penalty under Section 15HA of the SEBI Act was attracted even without quantified disproportionate gain or investor loss, and Section 15J was used to calibrate modest monetary penalties, with some noticees spared due to lack of quantified impact and prior debarment in related proceedings. en-us Mon, 14 Jun 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 09 Sep 2025 14:41:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=463624 Repeated small-quantity trades by connected entities, assessed on a preponderance of probabilities, were treated as sufficient to infer a coordinated scheme to create a misleading appearance of trading and influence the scrip price under the PFUTP Regulations. Direct and indirect links, including common directorship, address, email ID and off-market transfers, supported the finding against Noticees 1 to 4, 6, 7 and 9, while isolated trades by other noticees were not enough to fix liability. Once fraudulent and unfair trade practice was established, penalty under Section 15HA of the SEBI Act was attracted even without quantified disproportionate gain or investor loss, and Section 15J was used to calibrate modest monetary penalties, with some noticees spared due to lack of quantified impact and prior debarment in related proceedings. Case-Laws SEBI Mon, 14 Jun 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=463624