https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=794883 Mandatory mutual-fund compliance cannot be displaced by investor gains, absence of loss or complaints, or commercial expediency. Required investment due diligence was breached where decisions relied mainly on collateral and group reputation despite issuer weakness and inadequate assessment of credit, liquidity, and interest-rate risks. Close-ended schemes had to be fully redeemed and wound up at maturity unless the prescribed rollover process, including disclosures and written unitholder consent, was followed; delayed partial redemption and maturity extensions without that process were non-compliant. Material arrangements required disclosure to unitholders and SEBI. Contravention alone supported penalties where the applicable provisions did not require mens rea, and lack of ultimate investor prejudice did not require penalty reduction. en-us Mon, 13 Jul 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 14 Jul 2026 08:26:29 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=794883 Mandatory mutual-fund compliance cannot be displaced by investor gains, absence of loss or complaints, or commercial expediency. Required investment due diligence was breached where decisions relied mainly on collateral and group reputation despite issuer weakness and inadequate assessment of credit, liquidity, and interest-rate risks. Close-ended schemes had to be fully redeemed and wound up at maturity unless the prescribed rollover process, including disclosures and written unitholder consent, was followed; delayed partial redemption and maturity extensions without that process were non-compliant. Material arrangements required disclosure to unitholders and SEBI. Contravention alone supported penalties where the applicable provisions did not require mens rea, and lack of ultimate investor prejudice did not require penalty reduction. Case-Laws SEBI Mon, 13 Jul 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=794883