TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (4) TMI 2028
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Stock Exchange Ltd. (BSE). 2. The investigation, inter alia, revealed that during the period of investigation, BSE Sensex declined from 20,465.74 to 16,866.97 registering a decrease of 3,598.77 points (i.e. 17.58%). During the same period, price of the scrip increased from Rs. 9.37 to high of Rs. 292.60 (hitting circuit filter limit on all trading days) registering an increase of Rs.283.23 (i.e. 3,022.73%). 3. It was further revealed that BFL allotted 99 lakhs equity shares at a price of Rs 20/- per share on preferential basis to 49 entities which included one promoter entity namely M/s. Handful Investrade P. Ltd., to which 14.50 lakhs equity shares (i.e. 14.22%) were allotted on December 30, 2010. Since M/s. Handful Investrade P. Ltd. had acquired more than 5% of share capital, it was required to make disclosure u/r 7(1) of SEBI (Substantial Acquisition of Shares and Takeovers) Regulations, 1997 ('hereinafter referred to as SAST Regulations 1997) and u/r 13(1) of SEBI (Prohibition of Insider Trading) Regulations, 1992 ('PIT Regulations 1992') by January 03, 2011. It was found that M/s. Handful Investrade P. Ltd. made disclosures u/r 7(1) of Takeover Regulations a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hem. Further, consequent to the inter-departmental transfer and postings, the undersigned has been appointed the AO, vide order dated September 18, 2017 to inquire and adjudge the said matter. SHOW CAUSE NOTICE, REPLY AND HEARING 7. A common Show Cause Notice (hereinafter referred to as "SCN") bearing ref. no. EAD/BJD/MAS/30028/2017 dated November 30, 2017 was issued to the Noticees under Rule 4 of SEBI Adjudication Rules to show cause as to why an inquiry be not held against it in terms of Rule 4 of the Adjudication Rules and penalty be not imposed under Sections15A(b) &15 HA of the SEBI Act 1992 for the violations alleged to have been committed by the Noticees. Noticee 1& 2 vide their letters dated March 26, 2018, Noticee 3 vide letter dated April 13, 2018, Noticee 4 vide letter dated December 12, 2017, Noticee 5 vide letter dated April 19, 2018, Noticee 6 vide letter dated December 21, 2017, Noticee 7 has filed the settlement application and Noticee 8 vide letter dated December 22, 2017 requested for investigation report and order log trade log and Noticee 9 has been served the SCN by affixture. However, no reply has been filed by Noticee 9. 8. In the interest of natura....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nd to earn a decent return on investment. - Further, the price of the shares have constantly increased with active traded volume of 50 quantities being traded every day. Hence where a company has a traded volume of 50 shares almost every day, order request for 200 shares is a big quantity for those shares. Further in 10 out of 15 trades carried out by my client, 50 shares of the company were purchased by her in each trade, which in itself is the average trading volume of the scrip on most of the days. This itself is the reason for my client to place purchase request for those shares at a higher price above the L.T.P, so that she is able to purchase the same and take delivery of it. - There has been no intention nor any modus operandi followed to artificially create a price rise. 12. Rajat Share Broking P. Ltd vide letter dated December 12, 2017 has made submissions and the significant parts of the submission are reproduced as under: - In September 2010, the paid up capital of the company consists of 3, 00,000 equity shares of Rs. 10/- each consisting of 240 shareholders and out of this capital the total dematshres were Nil. - On December 31, 2....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tion to rig the price. - That we have not been provided pending buy order details for all our trading days i.e. 9th August 2011, 26th Aug 2011, 2nd September, 2011, 5th Sep 2011, 6th Sep 2011, 7th Sep 2011 & 8th Sep 2011. - That on 8th Sep 2011 there were 7 trades for 754 shares out of which we had bought 500 shares for delivery. NHP (New High Price) - That before Rajat Share Broking Pvt Ltd & Rahul Kumar Agarwal entered in the market for purchase of shares, the NHP has already increased to 2233% in case of Rajat Share Broking Pvt Ltd & 2416% in case of Rahul kumar Agarwal. The total increase in price was about 3001%. - There was no long term capital gain & shares were sold between 1 to 2 months after the purchase. Further vide letter identical to the letter submitted by Rajat shares and Rahul Kr Agarwal has submitted as under: - That the price on 3rd Nov 2011 was 9.37 & on 19th August 2011 was Rs. 226.45 when I entered in the market first time. At that time the price had already increased about 2416% & highest increase was about 3001%. - That I do not see anything wrong to enter in the market when the price had alre....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... August'2011 and 24th October'2011 I had sold the said shares purchased by me. - During the investigation period, (i.e. November 03, 2010 to September, 09, 2011), consisting of 222 trading days, the scrip in question was traded on 141 trading days on the Exchange, and on all trading days the scrip opened at a price higher than its previous closing price. Out of the said 141 trading days I have traded only on 16 Trading days, wherein I had purchased in all 900 shares, and had sold the said 900 shares. I had placed the orders above last traded price/previous day's closing price with sole intention so that the order placed by me gets executed. Apart from the orders, which were executed, I had placed various orders in the scrip in question during the investigation period, however, the other orders could not get priority and were not executed. The said fact may be verified from the order logs available with the SEBI. - Even subsequent to the investigation period the said scrip has witnessed huge volumes in 2012 as well as in 2013. - My total turnover during the period of investigation was Rs.22, 05, 36,038=60, whereas, my total turnover in the scri....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....contact with the said M/s. Anmol Finance Company, its partner/proprietor or any of its associates, or any other person named in the said show cause notice. - The learned Whole Time Member, Mr. Rajeev Kumar Agarwal, vide the ad interim ex-parte Order dated December 19, 2014, passed in the matter of Radford Global Limited and ad interim ex-parte Order dated April 17, 2015 passed in the matter of Mishaka Finance And Trading Limited, restrained me along with various other entities from accessing the securities market and further prohibited me from buying, selling or dealing in securities in any manner whatsoever, till further directions. Vide orders dated November 10, 2015 the learned Whole Time Member was pleased to revoke the directions issued against me. CONSIDERATION OF ISSUES 14. The issues that arise for consideration are as under: a. Whether M/s. Handful Investrade P. Ltd. Violated Regulation 7(1) of SAST Regulations, 1997 and BFL violated Regulation 7(3), 8(3) of SAST Regulations, 1997& 13(6) of PIT Regulations, 1992? b. Whether Ms. Sarita Chandak, Rajat Share Broking Pot. Ltd, Shree Gurudev Investment (Prop Jayesh Narendra Kesharia HUF), Rahul ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y or indirectly - (a) buy, sell or otherwise deal in securities in a fraudulent manner; (b) use or employ, in connection with issue, purchase or sale of any security listed or proposed to be listed in a recognized stock exchange, any manipulative or deceptive device or contrivance in contravention of the provisions of the Act or the rules or the regulations made there under; (c) employ any device, scheme or artifice to defraud in connection with dealing in or issue of securities which are listed or proposed to be listed on a recognized stock exchange; (d) engage in any act, practice, course of business which operates or would operate as fraud or deceit upon any person in connection with any dealing in or issue of securities which are listed or proposed to be listed on a recognized stock exchange in contravention of the provisions of the Act or the rules and the regulations made there under. 4. Prohibition of manipulative, fraudulent and unfair trade practices (1) Without prejudice to the provisions of regulation 3, no person shall indulge in a fraudulent or an unfair trade practice in securities. (2) Dealing in securiti....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ons, 1992 by January 03, 2011. It was observed that Noticee 1 did not make disclosure to the stock exchange under Regulation 7(1) of SAST Regulations, 1997. It was also observed that Noticee 2, did not disclose to stock exchanges under Regulation 13(6) of PIT Regulation 1992. BFL failed to make the disclosures received from M/s. Handful Investrade P. Ltd. to stock exchange. Therefore it was alleged that BFL (Noticee 2) violated Regulation 7(3), 8(3) of SAST Regulations, 1997 and Regulation 13(6) of SEBI (PIT) Regulations, 1992. 19. Noticee 1 & 2 vide letters dated March 26, 2018 submitted that they made the disclosures to BSE as require under Regulation 7(3), 8(3) of SAST Regulations, 1997 and Regulation 13(6) of PIT Regulations 1992 and the acknowledgement of the same from the BSE was submitted in support of their claim that they complied with the disclosure requirement. Noticee 1 submitted copy of its letter dated December 30, 2010 addressed to BSE, which had the acknowledgement seal of BSE dated December 30, 2010. Noticee 2 submitted copy of its letter dated January 2, 2011 addressed to BSE, which had the acknowledgement seal of BSE dated December 30, 2010. I note that let....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ulations, 1997 and Regulation 13(6) of PIT Regulations, 1992 stand established. DEALINGS OF NOTICEES 3-9 22. I note that during the period of investigation, the scrip traded on 141 days with total traded volumes of 9595 shares through 191 trades. The average volume for each day was 68 shares. I note that 140 trades were instrumental in establishing a new high price of 283.23. It was also observed that in respect of all trades which resulted in new high price buy orders were placed at upper circuit filter rate and later on sale orders were placed. 23. It was alleged in the SCN that Noticee 3-9 contributed substantially in creation of New High Price and thereby manipulated and violated Regulation 3 (a), (b), (c), (d), 4 (1), 4 (2) (b) & (e) of PFUTP. 24. In order to examine the charges, I consider it appropriate to analyse the order placement pattern of noticees in terms of timing and number of instance and also their connections with promoter related entities. Firstly, I note that there is no material available on record to suggest that Noticees are connected with any promoter related entity i.e. Anmol Finance Company. However, there are instances where Anmol was counter....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 0.85 Individual shareholders holding nominal share capital in excess of Rs. 1 lakh 58 8204950 8193950 80.44 Any Others (Specify) 6 414250 414250 4.06 Hindu Undivided Families 5 414150 414150 4.06 Clearing Members 1 100 100 0.00 Sub Total 299 8706500 8644450 85.36 28. Besides above the promoters were holding 14,93,500 shares constituting 14.64% of the share capital. I note from the shareholding pattern 94.64% of share capital is held only with 60 entities. And the balance is held by 237 entities out of which 51,050 shares constituting 0.5% of the share capital is in physical form. Thus it is apparent that 95% shares capital is closely held by few entities and thus the availability for shares in the market is severally constraint. Therefore only those entities that hold the shares can sale in scrip during the investigation as the scrip was in trade to trade segment. In the instant case I note that Amol Finance company was the counterparty for all buy trades which resulted in New High Price of Rs. 283.23. I note from the demat account statement of Amol that it had received 11,300 shares on February 15, 2011....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tity of 405 shares which is 55.48% of total buy quantity of Ms. Sarita Chandak. 33. I find from the SCN that out of a total of 140 instances establishing NHP of Rs. 283.23, on 14 instances (i.e. 10% of NHP trades) Ms. Sarita Chandak contributed to NHP of Rs 53.10 and positive LTP of Rs 53.10.Out of 17 trades, for 9 trades buy orders were placed in the range of 1-100 shares which contributed to 62.57% (Rs 35.60). 34. Noticee in it submissions stated that she was a small time investor and was tracking the price movement of BFL, since May 2011 and the continuous positive price movement prompted her invest in this scrip. I note from the corporate announcement, that BFL on May 30, 2011, informed the financial results for the period ended March 31, 2011. The result was relatively better than the previous years and therefore such news have the potential of creating buying interest in the shares. 35. I note that Noticee 3 was not holding any shares of BFL and had first dealt in the scrip during the period of investigation on June 14, 2011. Given that there was a corporate announcement in the scrip in the month of May 2011 and the fact that the price of the scrip was continuo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... SURBHIT AGARWAL 09:00:00.435215 11:31:16.041225 213.45 50 12/08/2011 SARITA CHANDAK ANMOL FINANCE COMPANY 09:00:00.163275 11:05:12.514331 217.7 5 16/08/2011 SARITA CHANDAK SUNLIGHT TRADING AND INVESTMEN 09:00:00.510717 13:37:44.186231 222.05 10 23/08/2011 SARITA CHANDAK JAYESH NARENDRA KESHARIA HUF 09:00:00.321623 09:16:34.154573 235.55 1 37. I note that Noticee 3 started purchasing shares after the first corporate announcement in the on the month of May 2011. The first lot of 313 shares were purchased on June 14, 2011 and balance of 517 shares after second corporate announcement made on July 8, 2011. These shares were sold on September 8, 9, 2011. The details of the sale transaction are as under. TRADE_DATE CLIENT_NAME CP_CLIENT_NAME ORDER_TIME CP_ORDER_TIME TRADE_RATE TRADED_QTY 08/09/2011 RAJAT SHARE BROKING PVT LTD SARITA CHANDAK 09:04:38.544680 15:29:15.887846 286.9 255 USHA HARENDRA DIXIT SARITA CHANDAK 09:15:01.968350 15:29:15.887846 286.9 74 USHA HARENDRA DIXIT SARITA CHANDAK 09:15:01.968350 15:29:23.378528 286.9 100....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ot connected with Anmol. 40. In view of above, I conclude that charge against Noticee 3 that it had manipulated the price of the scrip does not stand established. RAJAT SHARE BROKING P LTD (Noticee 4) 41. I note from the SCN that Noticee no .- 4 purchased 510 shares in 10 trades. Out the 10 trades, 4 trades were at LTP for 500 shares and other 6 trades with total traded quantity of 10 shares contributed to positive LTP of Rs 30.35 and NHP of Rs 30.35 (i.e. 10.57% of positive market LTP and 10.72 % of market NHP). It was also observed that all the 6 trades which contributed to positive LTP were first trades and the buy orders were placed at upper circuit limit rate before the sell orders were placed in the market. It was also observed that Noticee 4 and Noticee 6 are connected to each other. 42. I find from the SCN that out of a total of 140 instances establishing NHP of Rs. 283.23, on 15 instances (i.e. 10.71% of NHP trades) Noticee 4 and Noticee 6 together have contributed to NHP of Rs 49.55 and positive LTP of Rs 49.55. 43. Noticee 4 in its submissions stated that based on the technical analysis, they bought shares 9th August 2011 when the price was Rs. 209.30. The....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 270.4 1 06/09/2011 RAJAT SHARE BROKING JAYESH NARENDRA KESHARIA HUF 09:00:01.390122 09:31:13.734778 275.8 1 07/09/2011 RAJAT SHARE BROKING JAYESH NARENDRA KESHARIA HUF 09:00:00.443133 09:32:47.405014 281.3 1 08/09/2011 RAJAT SHARE BROKING RADHESHYAM RAMRIKH PUROHIT 09:04:38.544680 09:44:17.676930 286.9 25 RAJAT SHARE BROKING NIDHI LODHA 09:04:38.544680 10:15:12.819127 286.9 20 RAJAT SHARE BROKING HETAL NILESH GOR 09:04:38.544680 15:23:11.439173 286.9 200 RAJAT SHARE BROKING SARITA CHANDAK 09:04:38.544680 15:29:15.887846 286.9 255 45. I will now proceed to analyse the Order book one of the days when Noticee 4 had traded and party to First Trade. For the purpose of analysis, the order book on August 8, 2011 is as under: ORDER_DATE ORDER_TIME CLIENT_NAME RATE AVL_QTY 26/08/2011 09:00:00 RAJAT SHARE BROKING PVT LTD 249.95 500 26/08/2011 09:00:03 BAYA DEVI DUGAR 249.95 25 26/08/2011 09:00:07 SARIKA SINGHAL 249.95 500 26/08/2011 09:17:32 JAYESH NARENDRA KESHARIA HUF 249.95 1 26/08/2011 ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e 5 in its submissions stated that it a small time investors who identifies scrips to be dealt by identifying and tracking all those scrips which hit the circuit limits and spot an investment opportunity through technical analysis. Noticee also submitted that it does not know any promoter or Anmol and also submitted bank account and mobile records in support of its claim. Further, in support of its claim, it had also submitted list of similar scrips which it traded for small profits. 51. I note that Noticee 5 was not holding any shares of BFL and had first dealt in the scrip during the period of investigation on March 7, 2011. Given that the price of the scrip was continuously touching upper circuit limit from February 04, 2011 to March 7, 2011 i.e. one month, it is normal for any investors to be drawn to such pattern of price increase as the information regarding weekly / month gainers / circuit filter are available in public domain and specifically tracked by genuine investors for their investment decisions. Therefore, placing buy orders to get shares in the market to participate in the price rally is a normal pattern of dealings and cannot be faulted with unless there is othe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....42200 09:15:09.818713 88.25 50 07/06/2011 JAYESH NARENDRA KESHARIA HUF ANMOL 09:00:00.042200 09:20:43.366835 88.25 50 23/06/2011 JAYESH NARENDRA KESHARIA HUF ANMOL 09:00:00.123750 09:55:19.228030 111.6 50 29/06/2011 JAYESH NARENDRA KESHARIA HUF ANMOL 09:00:00.155601 09:40:54.540198 120.7 50 04/07/2011 JAYESH NARENDRA KESHARIA HUF ANMOL 09:00:00.019891 10:02:42.276226 128.05 50 Details of Sale Transactions TRADE_DATE CLIENT_NAME CP_CLIENT_NAME ORDER_TIME CP_ORDER_TIME TRADE_RATE TRADED_QTY 14/06/2011 LAHERCHAND SHAMJIBHAI LAKHAN JAYESH NARENDRA KESHARIA HUF 09:00:06.385151 09:25:43.944823 97.35 100 14/06/2011 SATISH NARAYAN HEGDE JAYESH NARENDRA KESHARIA HUF 09:15:53.623295 09:25:58.186320 97.35 10 14/06/2011 NELLAKKARA RAGHUNATH JAYESH NARENDRA KESHARIA HUF 09:59:28.408342 09:25:58.186320 97.35 2 14/06/2011 SARITA CHANDAK JAYESH NARENDRA KESHARIA HUF 10:16:31.622828 09:25:58.186320 97.35 88 19/08/2011 RAHUL KUMAR AGRAWAL JAYESH NARENDRA KESHARIA HUF 09:00:00.976553 09:1....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 68.5 200 19-05-2011 09:05:41 NIRAV RAJABABU GANDHI 68.5 300 19-05-2011 09:24:57 PREMLATA LATA JAIN 68.5 1000 19-05-2011 09:39:07 DAXABEN VIRENDRAPRASAD PANDYA 68.5 5 19-05-2011 10:18:36 SURENDRA CHOPRA 68.5 1000 54. From the above Order book, I note that there are 12 orders sitting in the Order book on price, time priority basis. Further, at 9:00 there were 8 orders which are placed in a gap of 8 seconds. This pattern suggests that there is no certainty that Noticee would be first in the priority always due to price time priority matching which is beyond the control of buyer. Given that the Anmol, Promoter related entity had selectively put only one sell order for less quantity, the first eligible buy order would get executed. In this case buy order of noticee, being first in priority, converted into trade. The SCN alleged that the first trades of Noticee had manipulated the price of the scrip. I am of the view that had the buy orders of Noticee being 3 or 4 in priority, it would not have got any shares and therefore the allegation of manipulation of price merely on the basis of First Trade would not stand. Based....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....on record of the connection of Noticee 6 with Anmolo Further, Anmol was also note counterparty to the trades of Noticee on any of its trading days. TRADE_DATE CLIENT_NAME CP_CLIENT_NAME ORDER_TIME CP_ORDER_TIME TRADE_RATE TRADED_QTY 19/08/2011 RAHUL KUMAR AGRAWAL JAYESH NARENDRA KESHARIA HUF 09:00:00.976553 09:16:28.142882 226.45 1 23/08/2011 RAHUL KUMAR AGRAWAL ANMOL FINANCE COMPANY 09:00:00.410676 11:43:00.861576 235.55 35 25/08/2011 RAHUL KUMAR AGRAWAL JAYESH NARENDRA KESHARIA HUF 09:00:00.489116 09:17:25.116163 245.05 1 29/08/2011 RAHUL KUMAR AGRAWAL JAYESH NARENDRA KESHARIA HUF 09:00:00.228215 09:20:22.114139 254.9 1 30/08/2011 RAHUL KUMAR AGRAWAL JAYESH NARENDRA KESHARIA HUF 09:00:02.106248 09:17:12.394620 259.95 1 60. I will now proceed to analyse the Order book one of the days when Noticee had traded and party to First Trade. For the purpose of analysis, the order book on August 11, 2011 which is as under: ORDER_DATE ORDER_TIME CLIENT_NAME RATE AVL_QTY 11/08/2011 09:00:00 SARITA CHANDAK 217.7 100 11/08/2011 09:0....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 64. I note that Noticee No .- 8, Ms. Hetal Gor bought 850 shares and sold 550 shares during the Investigation period. Hetal Gor bought 850 shares in 16 trades contributing to positive LTP of Rs 17.85 and NHP of Rs 17.85 (i.e. 6.22% of positive market LTP and 6.30% of market NHP). Upon analyzing the orders for the aforesaid trades, it was noted that all these trades were first trades and buy orders were placed at upper circuit filter rate before any sell order was placed. 65. I find from the SCN that out of a total of 140 instances establishing NHP of Rs. 283.23 on 16 instances (i.e. 11.42% of NHP trades) Noticee 8 contributed to NHP of Rs 17.85 and positive LTP of Rs 17.85. 66. I note that Noticee 8 did not file its material submission. Therefore, I shall be proceeding further based on the material on record. 67. I note that Noticee 8 was not holding any shares of BFL and had first dealt in the scrip during the period of investigation on March 9, 2011. Given that the price of the scrip was continuously touching upper circuit limit from February 04, 2011 to March 9, 2011 i.e. more than one month, it is normal for any investors to be drawn to such pattern of price increas....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....R ANMOL 09:00:00.079994 09:20:52.140816 63.4 100 18/05/2011 HETAL NILESH GOR ANMOL 09:00:00.102489 14:22:46.625868 67.2 50 20/05/2011 HETAL NILESH GOR ANMOL 09:00:00.070120 13:47:23.723686 69.85 50 27/05/2011 HETAL NILESH GOR ANMOL 09:00:00.100309 10:32:04.087710 77 50 SALES TRADE_DATE CLIENTNAME CP_CLIENT_NAME ORDER_TIME CP_ORDER_TIME TRADE_RATE TRADED_QTY 08/08/2011 SARITA CHANDAK HETAL NILESH GOR 09:00:00.250430 14:30:25.327552 205.2 50 08/09/2011 RAJAT SHARE BROKING HETAL NILESH GOR 09:04:38.544680 15:23:11.439173 286.9 200 09/09/2011 DHEERAJ BABULAL SHAH HETAL NILESH GOR 09:15:05.458230 11:55:53.667624 292.6 300 68. I will now proceed to analyse the Order book one of the days when Noticee had traded and party to First Trade. For the purpose of analysis, the order book on May 3, 2011 which is as under: ORDER DATE ORDER TIME CLIENTNAME RATE AVL QTY 03/05/2011 09:00:00 HETAL NILESH GOR 55.35 500 03/05/2011 09:00:00 KAMLESH N. SHAH HUF 55.35 500 03/05/2011 09:00:01 ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 9 - (SELLER) 70. It is noted during the investigation period that, only 20 sellers sold entire traded quantity of 9,595 shares, during the investigation period. Noticee No .- 9, M/s Anmol Finance Company (herein after referred as 'Anmol Finance') was the top seller with sale quantity of 6,490 shares. 71. As mentioned earlier, during the investigation period, 144 trades contributed to positive LTP of Rs. 287.08. Of these 144 positive LTP trades, 140 trades contributed to NHP of Rs. 283.23 and all of them were first trades. Out of 140 NHP trades, for 118 trades (i.e.84.28% of NHP trades), Anmol Finance was counterparty (seller) to the trades. Of the 118 NHP trades (on 118 days) where Anmol Finance was the seller, on 116 days, Anmol was the only entity placing sell orders in small quantity (i.e. at minimum lot of 50 shares) which was much lower than the quantity for which buyers were available and during these 116 trading days, there were no trades other than these 116 trades. By virtue of these sell orders placed by Anmol, the price of the scrip could go by Rs. 186.78.From the above, it is apparent that the supply of shares (delivery) in the scrip was artificial and ma....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sold shares consistently in smaller quantities at upper circuit filter price, the price of the scrip would not have moved up substantially from Rs. 9.37 to Rs. 281.20. Such artificial scrip price, mainly benefits the promoters and large shareholders. Since the orders were placed by Shri. Pradeep Dhanuka and he was connected to the Director, Compliance Officer & CFO of the company, they connived each other and artificially raised the scrip price through controlled supply. 78. I note from the demat account statement of Amol that it had received 11,300 shares on February 15, 2011 from Rajesh Tukaram Dambre and was already holding 200 shares before the transfer. From the pattern of trading by Noticee read in conjunction with the off market transfer and controlled sale consistently for 118 trading days with same pattern established beyond doubt the manipulative intent to increase the price. Further, due to close connection with promoter of BFL coupled only 240 shareholders, it is possible to control the supply of shares as shares were closely held by few shareholders. The fact that despite exponential increase in share price, none of the existing shareholders of the company did not f....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 1287.5 14/03/2011 ILA ASHWIN PATEL ANMOL 27 50 1350 15/03/2011 HETAL NILESH GOR ANMOL 28.35 50 1417.5 16/03/2011 HETAL NILESH GOR ANMOL 29.75 50 1487.5 17/03/2011 NATHILAL RUNGTA ANMOL 31.2 50 1560 18/03/2011 NAVIN SAWALDAS MUNYAL ANMOL 31.8 50 1590 21/03/2011 NAVIN SAWALDAS MUNYAL ANMOL 32.4 50 1620 22/03/2011 JAYESH NARENDRA KESHARIA HUF ANMOL 33 50 1650 23/03/2011 SUKIBAI SUNDESHA ANMOL 33.65 50 1682.5 24/03/2011 ILA ASHWIN PATEL ANMOL 34.3 50 1715 25/03/2011 ASHOK J SONI HUF ANMOL 34.95 50 1747.5 28/03/2011 ILA ASHWIN PATEL ANMOL 35.6 50 1780 29/03/2011 ILA ASHWIN PATEL ANMOL 36.3 50 1815 30/03/2011 ILA ASHWIN PATEL ANMOL 37 50 1850 31/03/2011 JAYESH NARENDRA KESHARIA HUF ANMOL 37.7 50 1885 01/04/2011 ILA ASHWIN PATEL ANMOL 38.45 50 1922.5 04/04/2011 ASHWIN GOPALBHAI PATEL ANMOL 39.2 50 1960 05/04/2011 HETAL NILESH GOR ANMOL 39.95 50 1997.5 06/04/2011 RADHESHYAM RAMRIKH....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ARIA HUF ANMOL 78.5 50 3925 31/05/2011 BHANWARLAL BABULAL SUTHAR ANMOL 80.05 50 4002.5 01/06/2011 JAYESH NARENDRA KESHARIA HUF ANMOL 81.65 50 4082.5 02/06/2011 BHANWARLAL BABULAL SUTHAR ANMOL 83.25 50 4162.5 03/06/2011 BHANWARLAL BABULAL SUTHAR ANMOL 84.9 50 4245 06/06/2011 BHANWARLAL BABULAL SUTHAR ANMOL 86.55 50 4327.5 07/06/2011 JAYESH NARENDRA KESHARIA HUF ANMOL 88.25 50 4412.5 08/06/2011 BHANWARLAL BABULAL SUTHAR ANMOL 90 50 4500 09/06/2011 NATHILAL RUNGTA ANMOL 91.8 50 4590 10/06/2011 NATHILAL RUNGTA ANMOL 93.6 50 4680 13/06/2011 BHANWARLAL BABULAL SUTHAR ANMOL 95.45 50 4772.5 14/06/2011 SURBHIT AGARWAL ANMOL 97.35 50 4867.5 15/06/2011 BHANWARLAL BABULAL SUTHAR ANMOL 99.25 50 4962.5 16/06/2011 SHEETAL DHEERAJ SHAH ANMOL 101.2 50 5060 17/06/2011 VIPAN KUMAR KOHLI ANMOL 103.2 50 5160 20/06/2011 SHILODAYA INVESTMENTS & FINANCE P. LTD. ANMOL 105.25 50 5262.5 22/06/2011 PURAV JASMIN VISARIA ANMO....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....LAL SHAH ANMOL 292.6 35 10241 DHEERAJ BABULAL SHAH ANMOL 292.6 95 27797 DHEERAJ BABULAL SHAH ANMOL 292.6 50 14630 DHEERAJ BABULAL SHAH ANMOL 292.6 100 29260 DHEERAJ BABULAL SHAH ANMOL 292.6 100 29260 Total Value 5,92,674 79. In view of above, I conclude that the price manipulation was planned and executed by Anmol (promoter's related entities) through complete control over the supply of shares which smoothly facilitated sustenance of consecutively hit upper circuit limit for 116 trading sessions. Thus, I conclude that the allegations against Noticee no .- 9, Anmol Finance Company for manipulating the scrip price and contributed to LTP & NHP through controlled sale orders (in minimum market lot) at upper circuit price, for registering trades on 116 trading days at BSE in violation of Regulation 3 (a), (b), (c), (d), 4 (1), 4 (2) (b) & (e) of PFUTP read with section 12A (a), (b) and (c) of SEBI Act, 1992 stand established. 80. The Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the matter of SEBI Vs. Shri Ram Mutual Fund [2006] 68 SCL 216(SC) and (2006) 131 Comp. Cas.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....g with value of traded value is mentioned in the Table above. I note that total value of shares used for the purpose of manipulating price of the scrip was Rs.283.23. (i.e. 3,022.73%). In 140 days. However the actual gain made by promoter and promoter related entities after the manipulation of the scrip(Post spilt) is not available in the file as it falls outside the investigation period. Therefore considering the role and involvement by the promoter related entity deliberately and consistently in 140 consecutive trading day and the value of the shares used for manipulation I consider to impose the penalty of Rs 25 Lakh on Noticee 9. ORDER 84. In view of the above, after considering all the facts and circumstances of the case and exercising the powers conferred upon me under Section 15-I of the Act and Rule 5 of Rules, I hereby impose the monetary penalties on the Noticees as under: Sr. No. Name of the Noticees Penal provisions as per the SEBI Act, 1992 Penalty Amount (in lakhs) 1. Handful Investrade P Ltd Section 15A(b) 10, 00,000(Rs Ten Lakh Only) To be paid jointly and severally by Noticee 1&2 2. Banas Finance Ltd Section 15A(b) 3. Ms....