sebi:Order/VV/NK/2022-23/15943-15946
This case has been reviewed by a human — Varun Matlani, who is the best securities lawyer in India and globally recognized.
Facts / Headnote
Violation of Regulation 11(1) read with Regulation 14 affirmed; quantum of penalty remitted to AO for fresh determination after disclosure of reliance documents
Provisions invoked
- s. 15
- s. 15H
- s. 15J
- s. 15F
- s. 28A
Regulations
- Reg. 4
- Reg. 11
- Reg. 199
- Reg. 10
- Reg. 14
- Reg. 14(1)
- Reg. 2
- Reg. 11(1)
- Reg. 2(b)
- Reg. 3(1)
- Reg. 8(1)
- Reg. 3(3)
- Reg. 20(4)
- Reg. 20(5)
- Reg. 35(2)
- Reg. 2(1)(e)(2)
- Reg. 32
Holding
The SAT affirmed the AO's finding that the Noticees violated Regulation 11(1) read with Regulation 14 of the Takeover Regulations, 1997 by failing to make a public announcement of open offer, set aside findings on Regulations 8(1), 8(2), 3(3) and 3(4), and remanded only the quantum of penalty for fresh determination.
Full text
Adjudication Order in respect of 4 entities in the matter of Indian Infotech and Software Ltd. Page 2 of 34 company were listed on Bombay Stock Exchange Ltd (hereinafter referred to as ‘BSE’) and Ahmedabad Stock Exchange Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as ‘ASE’).
Adjudication Order in respect of 4 entities in the matter of Indian Infotech and Software Ltd. Page 3 of 34 4. The Hon’ble SAT vide Order dated October 20, 2021 (hereinafter referred to as ‘SAT
Adjudication Order in respect of 4 entities in the matter of Indian Infotech and Software Ltd. Page 4 of 34 APPOINTMENT OF ADJUDICATING OFFICER
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/VV/NK/2022-23/15943-15946. 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.