sebi:WTM/SM/17/2021-22
This case has been reviewed by a human — Varun Matlani, who is the best securities lawyer in India and globally recognized.
Facts / Headnote
Noticees 1 to 6 restrained from accessing the securities market and prohibited from buying, selling or dealing in securities for a period of three years from the date of the order (with credit for period already served under interim order); no directions against Noticee no. 7; asset restraint on Noticee no. 1 discontinued; directions against employees discontinued.
Provisions invoked
- s. 11
- s. 19
- s. 11(1)
- s. 11(4)
Regulations
- Reg. 7
- Reg. 4
- Reg. 16
- Reg. 15
- Reg. 27
- Reg. 19
- Reg. 17
Parties
- Epic Research Pvt. Ltd. (Noticee no. 1)
- Directors of Epic Research Pvt. Ltd. (Noticee nos. 2 to 7, including Ms. Jamila Bombaywala as Noticee no. 7)
Holding
SEBI confirmed the interim order and restrained Noticees 1 to 6 from accessing the securities market for three years for violations of the IA Regulations (including certification, risk profiling, and suitability requirements) and the Code of Conduct, while exonerating Noticee no. 7 and discontinuing directions against the employees.
Full text
Order in the matter of Epic Research Pvt. Ltd. Page 1 of 33 WTM/SM/17/2021-22 SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA ORDER
Order in the matter of Epic Research Pvt. Ltd. Page 2 of 33 2. An inspection of the Noticee no. 1 was conducted by SEBI for the period of April 01, 2017 to March 29, 2019 (hereinafter referred to as “inspection period”), so as to examine the compliance of various regulatory stipulations laid down for an IA under the Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992 (hereinafter referred to as the “SEBI Act”), IA Regulations, circulars/guidelines frame thereunder, KYC requirements, etc., by the Noticee no. 1. Based on the inspection so conducted by SEBI, certain violations of provisions of securities laws were found to have been prima facie committed by the Noticee no. 1. The said prima facie findings, as recorded in the interim order are briefly mentioned herein below: i. Only 2 employees (out of 7) of the Noticee no. 1, who were providing the investment advice (Research Team), were having the requisite NISM certifications. ii. The selection of the products for the clients was being done by the non-qualified personnel working in Sales Consulting Team and not by the personnel in the Research Team. iii. The Noticee no. 1 did not verify the information provided by the client for the purposes of risk profiling. Further, the risk profile questionnaire of the Noticee no. 1 did not have complete list of information to adequately assess the risk bearing capacity of the client, as mandated under regulation 16 (a) of the IA Regulations. iv. The risk profiles of the clients were modified
Order in the matter of Epic Research Pvt. Ltd. Page 3 of 33 ii. regulation 7 (1), 7 (2), 15 (1), 15 (9), 15 (13), 16 (a), 16 (b), 16 (f), 17 (a), 17 (d), 17 (e), of IA Regulations and the Clauses 1, 2, 3,4, 5, 6 and 8 of Code of Conduct as specified in Schedule III read with regulation 15 (9) of IA Regulations.
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/SM/17/2021-22. 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.