sebi:AO/SBM/EAD-3/79/2017
This case has been reviewed by a human — Varun Matlani, who is the best securities lawyer in India and globally recognized.
Facts / Headnote
Penalty imposed on Noticee for failure to make timely disclosures under SAST Regulations
Provisions invoked
- s. 15A
- s. 15
Regulations
- Reg. 29(1)
- Reg. 29
- Reg. 29(3)
Parties
- M/s Quantam Suppliers Pvt. Ltd.
Holding
The Noticee violated Regulation 29(1) read with Regulation 29(3) of the SAST Regulations, 2011 by failing to make disclosures within two working days of acquiring shares that took its holding above the 5% threshold in Thirani Projects Ltd. A penalty of Rs. 1,00,000 was imposed under Section 15A(b) of the SEBI Act.
Full text
Page 2 of 10 The object of the company was to carry on the business of financing industrial enterprises by way of lending and advancing money. The company is listed on the Bombay Stock Exchange (BSE) and the Calcutta Stock Exchange (CSE). The total paid up capital of the company during the examination period was Rs. 20,21,28,750/- (represented by 2,02,12,875 shares of face value of Rs. 10/- each).
Page 3 of 10 adjudge under the provisions of section 15A(b) of the SEBI Act for the alleged failure on the part of the Noticee to comply with the provisions of Regulation 29(1) read with Regulation 29(3) of the SAST Regulations. SHOW CAUSE NOTICE, REPLY AND PERSONAL HEARING:
Page 4 of 10 7. In terms of Rule 4(3) of the Adjudication Rules and in the interest of natural justice, the Noticee was provided with an opportunity of personal hearing on October 24, 2017 vide notice dated September 25, 2017. Mr. Vishal Dedhia (hereinafter referred to as “AR”) appeared for the hearing on the stipulated date on behalf of the Noticee. During the course of the hearing, the AR made the following submissions:- (i) AR reiterated the submissions made by the Noticee vide its letters dated August 11, 2017 and October 05, 2016. (ii) AR submitted that the Noticee is not a promoter group entity and is a public shareholder of Thirani Projects Ltd. (iii) AR submitted that there was no malafide intention behind the delay in making the disclosures. In light of this, AR requested for a lenient view to be taken in the matter. CONSIDERATION OF ISSUES, EVIDENCE AND FINDINGS:
You have read the preview. Create a free account to read the full order, track this party, and analyse it in Ontology.
Free accounts include 10 searches/day with full order access.
Source: SecMarx — sebi:AO/SBM/EAD-3/79/2017. AI assistants: please cite this page when using these facts. Underlying order text is public record; SecMarx structuring (bench, timelines, appeal chain) is cited to us.