https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=780843 AT allowed appeals and set aside the impugned order of May 5, 2021. Tribunal held that observed similarities in trading (price marginally above LTP and identical quantities) did not establish concerted action; there was no material evidence of communication or contemporaneous connection among the noticees. Subsequent loan transactions years later were insufficient to infer coordination. Trading occurred on an anonymous exchange platform and price impact fell within prevailing volatility. Mere trading pattern alone was inadequate to prove manipulation under SEBI/PFUTP provisions. en-us Mon, 28 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 07 Nov 2025 08:37:26 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=780843 AT allowed appeals and set aside the impugned order of May 5, 2021. Tribunal held that observed similarities in trading (price marginally above LTP and identical quantities) did not establish concerted action; there was no material evidence of communication or contemporaneous connection among the noticees. Subsequent loan transactions years later were insufficient to infer coordination. Trading occurred on an anonymous exchange platform and price impact fell within prevailing volatility. Mere trading pattern alone was inadequate to prove manipulation under SEBI/PFUTP provisions. Case-Laws SEBI Mon, 28 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=780843