sebi:WTM/AN/MIRSD/MIRSD_RTAMB/23884/2023-24
This case has been reviewed by a human — Varun Matlani, who is the best securities lawyer in India and globally recognized.
Facts / Headnote
Prohibited from taking up any new assignment or contract i.e. onboarding new clients for a period of six (6) months from the date of this order.
Provisions invoked
- s. 19
Regulations
- Reg. 25
- Reg. 27(5)
- Reg. 26
- Reg. 9A
- Reg. 9A(1)(e)
Parties
- Alankit Assignments Limited
Holding
Alankit Assignments Limited, Category I Registrar and Share Transfer Agent, was held liable for delay in lodging and resolution of investor complaints and for incorrect submission of data, and was restrained from onboarding new clients for six months.
Full text
Page 2 of 27 3. Based on the conclusions of the inspection, SEBI observed alleged non-compliances by the Noticee in respect of its Registrar to an Issue and Share Transfer Agent activities during the inspection period. The nature of findings of the Inspection Team were as follows: (i) Delay in lodging Complaints/ Requests in records/ system in 60 instances out of sample of 168 instances taken during the inspection period. (ii) Delay in resolving complaints/requests in 57 instances out of sample of 60 instances taken during the inspection period beyond the stipulated time limit of 30 days. (iii) Incorrect submission of Data
Page 3 of 27 inspected, to produce to the inspecting authority such books, accounts and other documents in his custody or control and furnish him with the statements and information relating to the transactions in securities market within such time as the said officer may require.
Page 4 of 27 7. Subsequently, Noticee vide letter dated September 20, 2021, made submissions in reply to the SCN which are summarized below: (i) Alankit had been appointed RTA by SBI from July 01, 2018 and during the course of migration of physical share certificates, the cartons were damaged and certificates were mixed. Due to such intermingling coupled with old pendency and inflow of fresh communication from investors, certain complaints pertaining to non-receipt of certificates were closed inappropriately. (ii) In respect of 41 out of the 60 cases, the queries had originally been flagged as resolved, before an internal control team of Alankit highlighted that the resolution was not appropriate. As the complaints had to be resolved appropriately and the system did not allow opening of closed complaints, the complaints were entered again in the system. However, SEBI inspection team made their observations on the basis of first inward date. (iii) For the remaining 19 cases, Alankit submitted the following: S. No. Number of Complaints Alankit Comments 1. 2 The inward stamp of erstwhile RTA was considered as complaint lodgment date whereas Alankit’s stamp date shall be considered. 2. 3 There was delay in lodgment of these complaints received through e-mail and two of these complaints were resolved with delay. 3. 3 The date of letters is not clear and there is no inward stamp. However, the same have been entered in the system. 4. 1 There are multiple stamps affixed and Alankit r
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:WTM/AN/MIRSD/MIRSD_RTAMB/23884/2023-24. 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.