2020 (2) TMI 872

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....') imposing a penalty of Rs. 15 lacs for violation of the provisions of Regulations 3 and 4 of the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Prohibition of Fraudulent and Unfair Trade Practices relating to Securities Market) Regulations, 2003 (hereinafter referred to as, 'PFUTP Regulations') and Clauses A(1) to A(5) of the Code of Conduct specified in Schedule II read with Regulation 9 of the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Stock Brokers and Sub-brokers) Regulations. 2. The facts leading to the filing of the appeal is, that the appellant is a stockbroker and had registered a client, namely, Nilesh Prajapati who traded in the scrip of Dalal Street Investments Ltd. (DSIL) which were highly illiquid shares on September 10,....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ty of personal hearing was given. 5. Thus, we are of the opinion that the charge levelled against the appellant remained unreburted. Further, we find that the AO considered the material evidence on record and came to a conclusion that the price payable to the stock exchange pursuant to the default committed by the appellant's client in the delivery of shares was not recovered by the appellant from its client leads to an irresistible inference that the appellant was itself dealing in the illiquid scrip in order to create artificial volume and market price for vested gain. It has come on record that during the period when the appellant's alleged client sold 120 shares the price rose from Rs. 4,351/- per share to Rs. 4,438/- per sha....