https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=94087 AT allowed the appeal and quashed the impugned order against the appellants. The Tribunal held that the regulator failed to establish a nexus between the Group-1 entities (appellants) and Group-2 counter-parties and that the appellants traded only on two days of the investigation period at market price. The evidence did not support a finding of a coordinated manipulative scheme or artificial inflation of volumes in the illiquid scrip. The appellants' sale of their entire shareholding in Patch 1 was held to be genuine disposition upon observing price movement and, therefore, not violative of section 12A(a)-(c) of the SEBI Act or Regulations 3(a)-(d) and 4(1), 4(2)(a) of the PFUTP Regulations. en-us Wed, 12 Nov 2025 08:17:49 +0530 Wed, 12 Nov 2025 08:17:50 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=94087 AT allowed the appeal and quashed the impugned order against the appellants. The Tribunal held that the regulator failed to establish a nexus between the Group-1 entities (appellants) and Group-2 counter-parties and that the appellants traded only on two days of the investigation period at market price. The evidence did not support a finding of a coordinated manipulative scheme or artificial inflation of volumes in the illiquid scrip. The appellants' sale of their entire shareholding in Patch 1 was held to be genuine disposition upon observing price movement and, therefore, not violative of section 12A(a)-(c) of the SEBI Act or Regulations 3(a)-(d) and 4(1), 4(2)(a) of the PFUTP Regulations. Highlights SEBI Wed, 12 Nov 2025 08:17:49 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=94087