<?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>Insider trading show-cause notices issued by DGM challenged for lack of authority and fairness; notices quashed</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=95190</link>
    <description>The dominant issue was whether the show-cause notices alleging insider trading were without jurisdiction and violative of natural justice. Interpreting the statutory scheme for appointment/delegation of adjudicatory functions, and applying the legislative intent recognised in Vijay Karia, the court held that only an officer of the rank of CGM or above could validly initiate such action; a DGM lacked competence, making the notices ultra vires and amenable to writ interference despite the usual restraint against entertaining challenges to show-cause notices. The notices were also found vitiated by pre-determination of guilt and non-supply of relied-upon investigation material, breaching fairness and natural justice; consequently, the notices were quashed. - HC</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 19 Dec 2025 08:30:26 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 19 Dec 2025 08:30:27 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=872730" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Insider trading show-cause notices issued by DGM challenged for lack of authority and fairness; notices quashed</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=95190</link>
      <description>The dominant issue was whether the show-cause notices alleging insider trading were without jurisdiction and violative of natural justice. Interpreting the statutory scheme for appointment/delegation of adjudicatory functions, and applying the legislative intent recognised in Vijay Karia, the court held that only an officer of the rank of CGM or above could validly initiate such action; a DGM lacked competence, making the notices ultra vires and amenable to writ interference despite the usual restraint against entertaining challenges to show-cause notices. The notices were also found vitiated by pre-determination of guilt and non-supply of relied-upon investigation material, breaching fairness and natural justice; consequently, the notices were quashed. - HC</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>SEBI</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 19 Dec 2025 08:30:26 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=95190</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>