<?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 (11) TMI 786 - SC Order</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=781318</link>
    <description>SC upheld the Tribunal&#039;s finding that the broker breached duty by failing to exercise due skill, care and diligence, permitting synchronized and self-trades that disturbed market equilibrium and violated clause A(2) of the Code of Conduct under the Brokers Regulations. The Court found no error in law or fact, agreed that self-trading warranted penalty under s.15HB, and held the appeal raised no question of law under s.15Z of the SEBI Act. The appeal was dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 11 Nov 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 14 Nov 2025 09:42:53 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=864473" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (11) TMI 786 - SC Order</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=781318</link>
      <description>SC upheld the Tribunal&#039;s finding that the broker breached duty by failing to exercise due skill, care and diligence, permitting synchronized and self-trades that disturbed market equilibrium and violated clause A(2) of the Code of Conduct under the Brokers Regulations. The Court found no error in law or fact, agreed that self-trading warranted penalty under s.15HB, and held the appeal raised no question of law under s.15Z of the SEBI Act. The appeal was dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>SEBI</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 11 Nov 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=781318</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>