Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: finance act 2012 central chapter iii direct taxes Court: sebi securities and exchange board of india or securities appellate tribunal sat Page 1 of about 23 results (0.163 seconds)

Sebi Vs. Rayban Sun Optics India Ltd.

Court : SEBI Securities and Exchange Board of India or Securities Appellate Tribunal SAT

..... voting rights by an acquirer. in this regard it will be pertinent to advert to the judgement of hon'ble supreme court in reserve bank of india vs. peerless general finance and investment co. (1987) 1 scc 424 wherein it has , interalia , been observed that "interpretation must depend on the text and the context. they are the ..... any company) "no acquirer shall acquire shares or voting rights which (taken together with shares or voting rights, if any, held by him or by the persons acting in concert with him), entitle such acquirer to exercise [fifteen] percent or more of the voting rights in a company, unless such acquirer makes a public announcement to ..... any transactions directly relating to the u.s. void or voidable (the "required consents") shall have been obtained and all applicable waiting periods specified under the hsr act shall have been lapsed or been terminated." once the above contingency had been satisfied, the transaction was to proceed in three separate steps as set out in section .....

In Re: India Emerging Companies

Court : SEBI Securities and Exchange Board of India or Securities Appellate Tribunal SAT

..... the ahmedabad stock exchange.1.3 tata industries limited (hereinafter referred to as the 'acquirer') is part of the tata group and one of the promoters of tata finance limited (hereinafter referred to as 'erstwhile transferor'). the erstwhile transferor was amalgamated with tata motors limited (hereinafter referred to as 'tml') in accordance with the scheme of ..... regulations.6.1 in view of the above findings, i, in exercise of the powers conferred upon me under section 19 of the securities and exchange board of india act, 1992, read with regulation 4(6) of sebi (substantial acquisition of shares and takeovers) regulations, 1997, hereby grant exemption to the acquirer, from complying with regulation ..... 1.1 india emerging companies investment ltd. (hereinafter referred to as 'the target company') is a public limited company incorporated under the companies act, 1956, having its registered office at bezzola complex, v.n purav marg, chembur, mumbai - 400 071.1.2 the equity shares of the target .....

M/S Marwadi Shares and Finance Limited Vs. Securities and Exchange Boa ...

Court : SEBI Securities and Exchange Board of India or Securities Appellate Tribunal SAT

..... pmla is made out or not. since money laundering involves proceeds of a variety of crimes, certain specialised bodies like the income tax department, customs and central excise departments, police, officers of the board and the reserve bank of india etc. have been delegated the powers to prescribe the manner and mode of ..... for the appellant placed reliance on the order passed by this tribunal in the case of networth stockbroking ltd. vs. sebi (appeal no. 5 of 2012 decided on june 19, 2012) where this tribunal has observed that when an entity is charged with fraud, what we have to see is what is the evidence, direct or ..... as under:- january 2006 circular 2. back ground: 2.1 . 2.2 as per the provisions of the act, every banking company, financial institution (which includes chit fund company, a cooperative bank, a housing finance institution and a non-banking financial company) and intermediary (which includes a stock broker, sub-broker, share transfer agent, banker .....

Shailesh S. Jhaveri Vs. Securities and Exchange Board of India, Mumbai

Court : SEBI Securities and Exchange Board of India or Securities Appellate Tribunal SAT

..... was utilized for the purpose of subscribing to the shares of the company. the appellants had subscribed to the shares through cheques by withdrawing the credit balance and finance from m/s. rajesh jhaveri and the cheques were debited from the bank account of the appellants and got credited to the bank account of the company. the ..... to market manipulation, we have observed in the case of subhkam securities private limited vs. securities and exchange board of india (appeal no. 73 of 2012 decided on 25.7.2012) that expeditious disposal of such proceedings by the board alone will ensure that the board is carrying out its duties effectively to protect the interests of ..... investors in securities and to promote the development of and regulating the securities market as mandated by section 11(1) of the act. we have also observed .....

N. Narayanan Vs. the Adjudicating Officer Securities and Exchange Boar ...

Court : SEBI Securities and Exchange Board of India or Securities Appellate Tribunal SAT

..... did not raise any alarm bell. as in the case of the whole time director, shri n. narayanan, the three other appellants mentioned above also submitted that finance was the portfolio of the managing director and the accounts were accepted by them in board meetings since their veracity and accuracy have been tested by the professionals duly ..... prominent irregularities which should have alerted the directors. the appellants learned counsel submitted that abnormal profits, mismatch in receivables, insufficient security deposit in the bank did not act as an alert when the accounts have been certified by qualified professionals. we cannot accept the stand of the learned counsel for the appellants. the whole time director attending ..... s.s.n. moorthy 1. this order will dispose of eight appeals no.28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34 and 35 of 2012. 2. since the issue involved in these appeals is identical, a common order covering all the appellants is passed for the sake of convenience. 3. the appellants, .....

Pan Asia Advisors International Corporate Finance Minster House and An ...

Court : SEBI Securities and Exchange Board of India or Securities Appellate Tribunal SAT

..... to gdrs. (c) while framing operative guidelines for the limited two way fungibility under the 1993 scheme, by clarification no.22 it is clarified by central government that investments under the 1993 scheme are treated as direct foreign investments. as per the said guidelines, reissuance of gdr is permitted to the ..... these couple of exceptions, there does not seem to be any other provision either made by the parliament, ministry of finance, rbi or even by sebi under which sebi might have acted and looked into any alleged fraudulent or wrong methodology/modus operandi adopted by any party in the matter of creation and ..... pending further investigation, sebi passed ad interim exparte order on september 21, 2011 whereby appellants were restrained from accessing the indian securities market. on january 17, 2012, adinterim exparte order dated september 21, 2011 was confirmed. 6. preliminary investigation conducted by sebi during the investigation period related to following six companies:- i) .....

Sundaram Finance Ltd., Wheels Vs. Securities and Exchange Board of Ind ...

Court : SEBI Securities and Exchange Board of India or Securities Appellate Tribunal SAT

Reported in : (2003)3CompLJ145SAT

..... support of her submission that the adjudicating officer enjoyed the power to impose the penalty for belated filing of the report with the respondent. these decisions are (i) collector of central excise, calcutta v pradymna steel (196 (82) elt 441 (sc) and (ii)state of sikkim v dorjee tshering bhuta and ors (1991) 4 scc 243.in both ..... .6. learned counsel submitted that the order of the adjudicating officer imposing monetary penalty on the appellants is contrary to the decision of this tribunal in the housing development finance corporation (hdfc) case cited. he further submitted that even clause (a) of section 15a was not attracted to the appellants' case as there was no failure to ..... said factors and circumstances, the provisions of sections 15a(b) and 15i of the securities and exchange board of india act, 1992 i levy a total penalty of rs.1,50,000 on m/s. housing development finance corporation ltd.,".27. it is seen from the respondent's reply to the appeal that it had re-iterated section 15a .....

Dipak J. Panchal Vs. Securities and Exchange Board of India Sebi Bhava ...

Court : SEBI Securities and Exchange Board of India or Securities Appellate Tribunal SAT

..... doing so. the enquiry procedure rules were issued by the central government in exercise of the powers conferred by clause (d)(a) of sub-section (2) of section 29 of the act for holding enquiry for the purpose of imposing penalty under chapter via of the act. the power to impose penalty does not flow from these rules ..... whole ipo scam successful. the role of the appellants, as discussed above, pertains to permitting use of their bank accounts for opening fictitious demat accounts and arranging finance using these bank accounts, getting the shares allotted in the ipo to their accounts and ultimately selling these shares in the market thereby earning profit. in the facts ..... such a heavy penalty has been imposed on any other entity involved in the case except on excell multi tech limited which was held to be guilty of financing the ipo transactions. we also notice that a large number of cases have been settled through consent proceedings. the appellants were restrained from trading in the market .....

Fascinating Leasing and Finance Vs. Securities and Exchange Board of I ...

Court : SEBI Securities and Exchange Board of India or Securities Appellate Tribunal SAT

..... by them directly in the public issue and the financiers were holding these shares as mortgagees or pledgees. the patna high court's decision in arjun vs. central bank or the andhra pradesh high court's decision in narasayyamma vs. andhra bank relied upon by id. counsel, has no application to the instant case. ..... accruing on the said shares also accrue to the mortgagee either towards part satisfaction of the mortgage debt or otherwise. patna high court's decision in arjun vs.central bank of india (1954) 34 ilr 8) was cited in support of this contention. alternatively, he submitted that if for any reason it is held that ..... guilty of contravening the statutory provisions relating to substantial acquisition of shares.2. the appellant company viz. m/s. fascinating leasing & finance pvt.ltd. is a private limited company registered under the companies act, 1956 with the main object of carrying on non-banking financial business. the appellants acquired about 67% in the equity share capital .....

Bpl Limited Vs. Securities and Exchange Board of

Court : SEBI Securities and Exchange Board of India or Securities Appellate Tribunal SAT

..... in securities and to promote the development of, and to regulate the securities market and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto". section 3 of the act empowers the central government to establish a board by the name of the securities and exchange board of india, with a chairman and five members. the board is in ..... . the offer therefore was turned down. i understand that the said broker had also sent five crore worth of shares of money television ltd to sanyo finance. sanyo finance is a partnership firm belonging to the bpl group set up to manage media business". to another question as to "who made the offer for sale ..... that the appellant is engaged in the manufacture and marketing of consumer electronic products like colour tvs, home appliances, telecom products, etc. where as bsfl is a finance company engaged in the business of leasing, hire purchase, bill discounting, investment etc. he submitted that shareholding pattern of both the companies are distinct, that the .....