sebi:SRP/DL/AO-32/2009

SEBI · SEBI · 2006-09-05 · Satya Ranjan Prasad, Adjudicating Officer

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

Provisions invoked

• s. 11
• s. 15A
• s. 15
• s. 15J
• s. 11C
• s. 11C(3)

Regulations

• Reg. 11C(3)

Holding

The Noticee contravened Sections 11C(3) and 11C(5) of the SEBI Act by failing to furnish information and to appear before the Investigating Authority, attracting penalty under Section 15A. A monetary penalty of Rs.1,00,000 was imposed on the Noticee.

Full text

Page 2 of 8 APPOINTMENT OF ADJUDICATING OFFICER 3. Shri Biju S. was appointed as Adjudicating Officer (AO) vide order dated September 05, 2006 under section 15 I of the SEBI Act read with rule 3 of the SEBI (Procedure for Holding Inquiry and Imposing Penalty by Adjudicating Officer) Rules, 1995 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Rules’) to inquire into and adjudge under section 15A of the SEBI Act, the violations alleged to have been committed by the Noticee.

Page 3 of 8 subsequently forwarded to the Noticee on October 01, 2009. The Noticee submitted its reply to the SCN vide letter dated November 24, 2009. For conduct of inquiry under rule 4(3) of the Rules an opportunity of hearing was granted to the Noticee on December 17, 2009, which was attended by Mr. Aditya Bhansali and Ms. Nikita Chirania, the authorized representatives of the Noticee.

Page 4 of 8 b) The period of summons was a stressful period for the company, wherein the company had to face severe hardships. c) As on date due to oodles of changes in the officials of the company we are not aware of the summons sent to the company and their status of compliance if any. d) Almost all of the employees of the company have changed since the time of issuance of summons and today. e) The board of directors of the company since the time of issuance of the summons and as on date, have also undergone change. f) The company did not have sufficient finances to keep competent persons for taking care of the compliances and the Registrar of Companies for this reason had issued a show cause notice dated September 13, 2007 since the company even did not have a company secretary. g) Due to the changes in the offices and employees of the company since 2004, till date, we did not even had the copy of the show cause notice issued to us and it was only after your goodself supplied us with the show cause notice and the relied upon documents, we are able to file the reply. h) The company has after facing great financial stress and after the hard work and commitment of the new officers been able to revive itself. If any, penalty is imposed on the company; it would not only destroy its reputation but would also put stress on the financial position of the company.

Source: SecMarx — sebi:SRP/DL/AO-32/2009. 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.