sebi:EAD-9/VKV/GSS/2020-21/10083-10085
This case has been reviewed by a human — Varun Matlani, who is the best securities lawyer in India and globally recognized.
Facts / Headnote
Violation found; penalty of Rs. 2,00,000 each imposed on the three Noticees
Provisions invoked
- s. 15A
- s. 15I
- s. 15J
- s. 15
- s. 15F
- s. 28A
- s. 21
Regulations
- Reg. 13
- Reg. 12
- Reg. 103
Parties
- Smita D Gandhi
- Yogesh Shah
- Yogesh Bhai Shah HUF
Holding
The Noticees violated regulation 13(4A) r/w 13(5) of SEBI (PIT) Regulations, 1992 r/w Regulation 12 of SEBI (PIT) Regulations, 2015 and are liable to monetary penalty under section 15A(b) of the SEBI Act, with Rs. 2,00,000 imposed on each Noticee.
Full text
Adjudication Order in respect of Smita D Gandhi, Yogesh Shah and Yogesh Shah HUF Page 2 of 8 (Procedure for Holding Inquiry and imposing penalties) Rules, 1995 (hereinafter referred as ‘AO Rules’) under the provisions of section 15A(b) of the SEBI Act. SHOW CAUSE NOTICE, REPLY AND HEARING
Adjudication Order in respect of Smita D Gandhi, Yogesh Shah and Yogesh Shah HUF Page 3 of 8 II. Does the violation, if any, on the part of the Noticees attract monetary penalty under section 15A(b) of the SEBI Act?
Adjudication Order in respect of Smita D Gandhi, Yogesh Shah and Yogesh Shah HUF Page 4 of 8 Issue No. I: Whether Noticees have violated regulation 13(4A) of SEBI (PIT) Regulations,1992 r/w 13(5) of SEBI (PIT) Regulations,1992 r/w Regulation 12 of the SEBI (PIT) Regulations, 2015?
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:EAD-9/VKV/GSS/2020-21/10083-10085. 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.