sebi:Order/BS/AE/2017-18/1230
This case has been reviewed by a human — Varun Matlani, who is the best securities lawyer in India and globally recognized.
Facts / Headnote
Disposed of without any penalty
Provisions invoked
- s. 15A
- s. 15I
Regulations
- Reg. 29(2)
- Reg. 30(3)
- Reg. 30(2)
- Reg. 201
- Reg. 2(1)(q)(2)
Parties
- Mr. Dilip Sheth
- Mr. Nayan B. Sheth
- Mrs. Chetna D. Sheth
- M/s. Alang Industrial Gases Ltd.
Holding
The Adjudicating Officer disposed of the matter without imposing any penalty on the Noticees for the delayed disclosures under Regulation 29(2) read with 29(3) and Regulation 30(2) read with 30(3) of the SAST Regulations, 2011.
Full text
Page 2 of 7 period and therefore were persons acting in concert in terms of Regulation 2(1)(q)(2)(iv) of SAST Regulations, 2011. The collective shareholding of the Noticees as on December 2012 was 43.18% of the share capital of APCL. It was observed that on March 25, 2013, Noticee No. 4 sold 13,60,000 shares constituting 23.41% shareholding of APCL. Pursuant to this transaction the shareholding of Noticee No. 4 in APCL decreased from 23.41% to 0 and the collective shareholding of the Noticees from decreased from 43.18% to 19.77%. BSE vide email dated May 11, 2015 has informed SEBI that disclosure under Regulation 29(2) of SAST Regulations, 2011 was received from the Noticees on April 08, 2013 i.e. after a delay of 6 days. Therefore the Noticees were alleged to have violated regulation 29(2) read with 29(3) of SAST Regulations, 2011.
Page 3 of 7 Adjudicating Officer) Rules, 1995 (hereinafter referred to as “Rules”) for the violations as specified in the SCN.
Page 4 of 7 iv. On going through the contents of notice reference no.: EAD- 5/ADJ/SVKM/ AA/OW/7182/1/2017 dated 24.03.2017, I came to know that there was delay of 1day, as per provision of SAST Regulations 2011, 30(2) r/w 30(3) due date of compliance was 12.04.2012 whereas it shows in notice that actual date of compliance was 13.04.2012 which shows delay of 1day. To put more light on this issue, Sir, I would like to say that the reason for delay could be from BSE Inward department or delay from the side of Courier company but not any willful delay mistake from our side, as looking at my track record as a promoter director since years, I am very responsible Indian Citizen, I highly respect the law of SEBI with integrity, there is no such record of delay in my lifespan of more than 2 decades as a director, so I think, chances of causing 1day delay can be that, the submission was sent from my end on time but delay occurred at courier level or due to 1day delay in completing inward entry at BSE is also possible. v. Considering the fact that the delay was not at all intentionally referring to all above mentioned possibilities, I would like to sincerely request your honor to look into the matter soft heartedly, we three are highly apologized for the said delay, let anything be the cause. We three, sincerely request for your forgiveness, we will be highly obliged for your kindness in this matter. vi. Secondly, as per the provisions of SAST Reg. 2011 29(2) r/w 29(3) date of transacti
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:Order/BS/AE/2017-18/1230. 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.