sebi:MC/CB/12/2018
This case has been reviewed by a human — Varun Matlani, who is the best securities lawyer in India and globally recognized.
Facts / Headnote
Penalty of Rs. 2,00,000 imposed on the Noticee
Provisions invoked
- s. 15A
- s. 15I
- s. 15J
Regulations
- Reg. 13(1)
- Reg. 7(1)
- Reg. 29(1)
Parties
- Mr. Sunil Dadha
Holding
The Noticee violated Regulation 13(1) of the PIT Regulations and Regulation 29(1) read with 29(3) of the SAST Regulations by failing to disclose acquisition crossing 5% shareholding, and a consolidated penalty of Rs. 2,00,000 under Section 15A(b) of the SEBI Act was imposed on Mr. Sunil Dadha.
Full text
Adjudication Order in the matter of SMS Techsoft (India) Limited Page 2 of 10 (b) of the SEBI Act against the Noticee for the alleged violation of Regulation 13(1) of PIT Regulations and Regulation 29(1) read with 29(3) of the SAST Regulations. Subsequently, the undersigned was appointed as the Adjudicating Officer on May 29, 2018 which was communicated vide order dated June 19, 2018.
Adjudication Order in the matter of SMS Techsoft (India) Limited Page 3 of 10 SEBI (Prohibition of Insider Trading) Regulations, 1992 13. (1) Any person who holds more than 5% shares or voting rights in any listed company shall disclose to the company in Form A, the number of shares or voting rights held by such person, on becoming such holder, within 2 working days of :— (a) the receipt of intimation of allotment of shares; or (b) the acquisition of shares or voting rights, as the case may be.
Adjudication Order in the matter of SMS Techsoft (India) Limited Page 4 of 10 7. The Noticee, vide letter dated March 08, 2018 submitted his reply towards the SCN. The core submissions of the Noticee are summarized as under: a) The Noticee admitted purchase of 2131904 shares of the Company on April 11, 2014. The Noticee submitted that he was not aware of the fact that his holding in the Company would cross the threshold of 5% as a result thereof and would require disclosures under relevant SEBI regulations. b) The Noticee submitted that any violation of SEBI regulations was due to ignorance and was neither intentional nor deliberate. c) The Noticee submitted to treat the violation as a ‘technical error’. The Noticee also submitted that he had filed the required disclosures to stock exchange on May 23, 2016 and submitted copies of disclosures filed in this matter.
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:MC/CB/12/2018. 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.