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, .....
Tag this Judgment!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 .....
Tag this Judgment!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) .....
Tag this Judgment!