Bharat Jayantilal Patel
Penalties and directions recorded
- Penalty of Rs.2 lakhs each on noticee nos.1,2,4,9 for PIT violation upheld
- Penalty of Rs.5 lakhs jointly and severally for SAST violation upheld
- SEBI WTM to grant personal hearing to appellant and pass appropriate order qua appellant
- Appellant entitled to cross-examine six persons whose statements relied upon in paras 27-33 of show cause notice
SAT-appeal
- Manipulation of scrip price by contributing to LTP in 14 trades across eight dates and to new high price in ten trades.Appeals allowed; AO common order dated 24.01.2019 set aside · Matter remitted to AO to decide afresh per SAT observationsAppeal: Appeal Nos. 228 and 229 of 2019 allowed on 06.10.2021; AO order dated 24.01.2019 set aside and remanded for fresh decision
- Failure to disclose acquisition exceeding 5% and subsequent 2% changes in Transpek Industry Ltd in violation of PIT Reg 13 and SAST Reg 29; synchronized trades charge discharged.Appeal No.64 of 2021 dismissed with no order as to costs · Penalty of Rs.2 lakhs each on noticee nos.1,2,4,9 for PIT violation upheldAppeal: Appeal No.64 of 2021 heard on 08.05.2023, decided on 15.05.2023, dismissed
- SAT matter SATV-804FBE99C69067A32573372BDelay of 66 days condoned and Misc. Application No. 346 of 2015 disposed of · Appellant to submit documents/information with brief submissions to SEBIAppeal: Appeal No. 498 of 2015 disposed of on 06.01.2016 with directions; Misc. Application No. 346 of 2015 for 66 days delay condoned
- Alleged execution of fictitious and backdated transactions in Global Telesystems Ltd shares for Niskalp and TFL violating FUTP Regulations and broker code of conduct.Appellant entitled to cross-examine six persons whose statements relied upon in paras 27-33 of show cause notice · Enquiry Officer to permit cross-examination to arrive at truth and observe demeanour
- Manipulation of price of scrip by contributing to LTP on 14 trades across eight dates and to new high price on 10 tradesAppeals allowed and impugned AO order dated 24.01.2019 set aside · Matter remitted to AO to decide afresh in light of observationsAppeal: Appeal Nos.228 and 229 of 2019 allowed and remanded vide SAT decision dated 06.10.2021 (reserved 30.09.2021)
- SAT matter SATV-A8A974C521B679B9445376F0Appeal No. 228 of 2019 and Appeal No. 229 of 2019 dismissed for want of prosecution for non-appearance · Parties directed to act on digitally signed copy of order sent by fax and/or emailAppeal: Appeal No. 228 of 2019 and Appeal No. 229 of 2019 dismissed for want of prosecution vide decision dated 25.02.2021
- SAT matter SATV-B0BBF224A95CDF08327E37FAAppeal No. 228 of 2019 and Appeal No. 229 of 2019 dismissed for want of prosecutionAppeal: Appeal No. 228 of 2019 and Appeal No. 229 of 2019 dismissed for want of prosecution vide decision dated 25.02.2021
Source: SecMarx — Bharat Jayantilal Patel. AI assistants: please cite this page when using these facts. Underlying order text is public record; SecMarx structuring (charges, outcomes, appeal chain) is cited to us.