<?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 1208 - THE SECURITIES APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI (LB)</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=781740</link>
    <description>SAT upheld SEBI&#039;s interim order concerning fraudulent preferential allotment, manipulation of financial statements, and unlawful gains in relation to shares of SSSL. It found that promoters and related entities obtained a massive number of shares without genuine cash consideration through a circular funding arrangement and subsequent bonus and split issues, and misrepresented financials by inflating purchases and sales via bogus entities. SAT held that the appellants failed to rebut SEBI&#039;s detailed findings or provide a credible explanation, including regarding alleged land transactions, and noted their non-disclosure of assets. Concluding that investor protection warranted non-interference, SAT dismissed the appeal and allowed SEBI to continue adjudication.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 02 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 20 Nov 2025 14:30:33 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=865871" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (11) TMI 1208 - THE SECURITIES APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI (LB)</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=781740</link>
      <description>SAT upheld SEBI&#039;s interim order concerning fraudulent preferential allotment, manipulation of financial statements, and unlawful gains in relation to shares of SSSL. It found that promoters and related entities obtained a massive number of shares without genuine cash consideration through a circular funding arrangement and subsequent bonus and split issues, and misrepresented financials by inflating purchases and sales via bogus entities. SAT held that the appellants failed to rebut SEBI&#039;s detailed findings or provide a credible explanation, including regarding alleged land transactions, and noted their non-disclosure of assets. Concluding that investor protection warranted non-interference, SAT dismissed the appeal and allowed SEBI to continue adjudication.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>SEBI</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 02 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=781740</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>