sebi:VSS/AO-48/2009
This case has been reviewed by a human — Varun Matlani, who is the best securities lawyer in India and globally recognized.
Facts / Headnote
Monetary penalty of Rs.1,50,000 imposed on the Noticee for violation of regulation 13(6) of PIT
Provisions invoked
- s. 15A
- s. 15
- s. 15J
Regulations
- Reg. 7
- Reg. 13
- Reg. 13(6)
Parties
- Alka India Ltd.
Holding
The Noticee violated regulation 13(6) of the PIT Regulations by failing to make timely disclosure to BSE and ASE and is liable to monetary penalty under section 15A(b) of the SEBI Act. A monetary penalty of Rs.1,50,000 was imposed on the Noticee.
Full text
Page 2 of 8 make necessary disclosure under regulations 13(6) of PIT with regard to the aforesaid sale of shares by Satish Pancharia to Bombay Stock Exchange (hereinafter referred to as ‘BSE’) and Ahmedabad Stock Exchange (hereinafter referred to as ‘ASE’). The same is confirmed by BSE and ASE vide their letters No. DCS/SKJ/RCG/58/ 2008-09 and ASE/SUR/0809/SEBI/Alka India Ltd./ dated July 11, 2008 and July 15, 2008, respectively. Consequently, it was alleged that AIL was liable for
Page 3 of 8 “…we have submitted to the stock exchanges disclosures under Insider trading Regulations from the company regarding the sale of shares by the promoters through the courier relying upon the evidence being the copy of Courier receipt.”
Page 4 of 8 c) If so, what would be the monetary penalty that can be imposed taking into consideration the factors mentioned in section 15J of SEBI Act?
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:VSS/AO-48/2009. 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.