<?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>Settlement-price depression requires proof of manipulation, not merely short exposure, late selling, or below-market orders, preserving disclosure penalties.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=104709</link>
    <description>PFUTP liability for alleged settlement-price depression requires cogent evidence of a manipulative act directed at producing an artificial price, not merely a large short derivatives position, closing-window cash sales, or sell orders below the last traded price. Fraud under Regulation 2(1)(c) ordinarily requires inducement; where inducement is not directly established, manipulation requires compelling evidence from market-wide activity, execution mechanics, commercial rationale, and causal price impact. Position-limit breaches and agency-based concentration may support disclosure penalties but do not alone prove fraud. Combined exposure across all derivative contracts must be considered where required by the governing framework. Failure to establish intended price depression precluded PFUTP fraud and disgorgement, while the non-disclosure penalty remained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 08 Oct 2026 13:15:47 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 08 Oct 2026 13:15:47 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=928704" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Settlement-price depression requires proof of manipulation, not merely short exposure, late selling, or below-market orders, preserving disclosure penalties.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=104709</link>
      <description>PFUTP liability for alleged settlement-price depression requires cogent evidence of a manipulative act directed at producing an artificial price, not merely a large short derivatives position, closing-window cash sales, or sell orders below the last traded price. Fraud under Regulation 2(1)(c) ordinarily requires inducement; where inducement is not directly established, manipulation requires compelling evidence from market-wide activity, execution mechanics, commercial rationale, and causal price impact. Position-limit breaches and agency-based concentration may support disclosure penalties but do not alone prove fraud. Combined exposure across all derivative contracts must be considered where required by the governing framework. Failure to establish intended price depression precluded PFUTP fraud and disgorgement, while the non-disclosure penalty remained.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>SEBI</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 08 Oct 2026 13:15:47 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=104709</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>