https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=782094 The SAT dismissed the appeal as not maintainable, noting that no specific impugned order was challenged. The appellant had entrusted shares to Karvy, whose depository participant business was later acquired by IIFL. SAT recorded that IIFL had already informed the appellant that the shares had been transferred to third parties, including one relative of the appellant. SAT held that the matter fell beyond the jurisdictional scope envisaged and found no basis to interfere or grant directions for refund of the value of the allegedly disappeared shares. Consequently, the appeal was rejected on merits and dismissed. en-us Thu, 08 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 25 Nov 2025 08:55:39 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=782094 The SAT dismissed the appeal as not maintainable, noting that no specific impugned order was challenged. The appellant had entrusted shares to Karvy, whose depository participant business was later acquired by IIFL. SAT recorded that IIFL had already informed the appellant that the shares had been transferred to third parties, including one relative of the appellant. SAT held that the matter fell beyond the jurisdictional scope envisaged and found no basis to interfere or grant directions for refund of the value of the allegedly disappeared shares. Consequently, the appeal was rejected on merits and dismissed. Case-Laws SEBI Thu, 08 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=782094