TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (11) TMI 373
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....asekhar Sundaresan, Mr. Zerick Dastur, Ms. Sneha Sheth, Ms. Archana Uppuluri and Mr. Kunal Kothary, Advocates i/b ZerickDastur Advocates & Solicitors For The Respondent : Mr. Kevic Setalvad, Senior Advocate with Mr. Mihir Mody, Ms. Shreya Parikh, Mr. Anupam Surve and Mr. Nishant Upadhyay, Advocates i/bK. Ashar & Co JUDGEMENT Per : Dr. C.K.G. Nair, Member (Oral) 1. By this Miscellaneous Application Applicants / Original Appellants seek extension of the period of interim relief granted by this Appellate Tribunal vide order dated 15.02.2018. By the said order Applicants / Appellants were allowed to continue with the auditing assignments of their existing clients till 31.03.2019 or till a newly constituted Bench takes an appropriate final....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....a sweeping impugned order which has violated the premises set forth by the Bombay High Court. Further, there are serious questions of law which need to be addressed since the impugned order failed to establish any vicarious liability of the parties (Applicants / Appellants) because it was the Bengaluru firm that conducted the audit of Satyam Computers several years back. Accordingly, and in the absence of an appropriate Bench in SAT to hear the appeal now extending the interim relief already granted by this Appellate Tribunal while doing justice to the Applicants / Appellants would cause no harm or prejudice to SEBI or to public interest. 4. The Applicants / Appellants, while pressing for extending the interim relief relied on the judgment....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....is crucial in deciding this Miscellaneous Application the same is given below:- (a) 10.01.2018 - SEBI issued the order impugned in Appeal No. 6 of 2018 (as well as in Appeal No. 7 of 2018). The said order, inter alia, directed that entities / firms practicing as Chartered Accountants in India under the brand and banner of PW, shall not directly or indirectly issue any certificate of audit of listed companies, compliance of obligations of listed companies and intermediaries registered with SEBI and the requirements under the SEBI Act, 1992, the SCRA 1956, the Depositories Act, 1996, those provisions of the Companies Act 2013 which are administered by SEBI under section 24 thereof, the Rules, Regulations and Guidelines made under those Acts....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....to lack of quorum. (k) 08.10.2018 - Miscellaneous Application No. 324 of 2018 filed seeking extension of time of relief from 31.03.2019 to 31.03.2020 7. As is evident from the above chronology / timelines given the urgency pressed by the Learned Senior Counsel for the Applicants / Appellants, prayer for interim relief was urgently heard and disposed of in terms of two orders of this Appellate Tribunal dated 19.01.2018 and 15.02.2018 soon after filing the appeal. The operational part of the order by this Appellate Tribunal dated 15.02.2018, reads as follows:- "11. We have carefully considered the rival submissions of the parties at length and we are of the considered opinion that if the request of the appellants for further interim reli....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cision in the matter. The question of "appropriate Bench" had arisen since the then Presiding Officer had recused himself from hearing the appeals when the matter was mentioned on 17.01.2018. Therefore, these appeals were heard and the interim prayers disposed of by a Division Bench consisting of Member Shri Jog Singh and Member Dr. C.K.G. Nair vide two orders dated 19.01.2018 and 15.02.2018. On 19.02.2018 Shri Jog Singh demitted office. On 23.03.2018 the then Presiding Officer, along with Member Dr. C.K.G. Nair had agreed to hear the matter since the reason to continue with the recusal of the then Presiding Officer did not exist anymore. Both the Applicants / Appellants and the Respondent SEBI gave their written consent for the Bench consi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Officer demitted office. Thus a window for hearing and disposing of the matter was available for more than three months. The counsel for the parties, particularly, the counsel for the Applicants / Appellants for whom early hearing the appeal was very crucial as they had approached this Appellate Tribunal within a week of the impugned order and interim reliefs were also given in a very short time frame, neither availed this window of three months plus nor even intimated a date to the Registry as stated in the Court on 06.04.2018. 10. Responding to the administrative order dated 18.06.2018 the Applicants / Appellants in an affidavit submitted that the counsel for the parties could not fix an immediate future date of hearing because of the v....