TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (10) TMI 1052
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....RDER Per : Justice Tarun Agarwala Misc. Application No.98 of 2018 For the reasons stated in the application, the delay in filing the appeal is condoned. The Misc. Application is allowed. Appeal No.115 of 2018 1. The appellant is a private Company and is a minority shareholder in New Delhi Television Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as 'NDTV'). With regard to non-disclosure of a tax demand under Clause 36 of the Equity Listing Agreement prescribed by the Stock Exchange (hereinafter referred to as 'Listing Agreement') by the Company, the appellant made a complaint to the stock exchange as well as to the Securities and Exchange Board of India (hereinafter referred to as 'SEBI'), based on which adjudication proceedings were initi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....today before the Securities and Exchange Board of India ("SEBI" for short). 2. If the appellant makes a representation within two weeks from today then the appropriate authority of SEBI shall consider the said representation and pass appropriate order thereon in accordance with law within a period of eight weeks from the date of receiving the representation. 3. Appeal is disposed of in the aforesaid terms with no order as to costs." 4. It transpires that a modification application was filed for modification of the order dated 10th October, 2017. The said application was rejected by an order dated 12th October, 2017. The relevant extract of the order dated 12th October, 2017 passed by the Tribunal is extracted hereunder:....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....es set out in the memo of appeal. 6. Based on the orders of the Tribunal dated 10th October, 2017 and 12th October, 2017, a representation was filed which was rejected by the Whole Time Member (hereinafter referred to as 'WTM') by an order dated 20th December, 2017. The appellant being aggrieved by the said order has filed the present appeal. 7. In the representation, the appellants had enumerated that the violations which is alleged to have been made by the Company NDTV was required to be investigated and appropriate orders were required to be passed. The WTM found that out of the nine violations only two violations formed the cause of grievance which was mentioned in the appeal filed before this Tribunal. The remaining seven violati....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... should be penalized has now been set at rest. 10. The contention of the appellant that the remaining seven alleged violations should also be considered as they were part of the appeal that was filed before this Tribunal is patently misconceived. In this regard, the learned counsel tried to impress upon the Tribunal by placing reliance on the additional affidavit dated 17th November, 2015 contending that the said affidavit was part of the record of the Tribunal which contained the allegations and, therefore, the said allegations were required to be considered by the WTM. 11. The contention of the learned counsel for the appellant is patently misconceived and cannot be accepted. The order of the Tribunal dated 12th October, 2017 clearl....