RDB Rasayans Ltd.

6 matters before the Securities Appellate Tribunal

Penalties and directions recorded

Joint and several aggregate penalty of Rs. 3 crore under Sections 15HA and 15HB was upheld.
Penalty of Rs. 5 lakh under Section 23H of the SCRA against Sandeep Baid was upheld.
SEBI may recover the penalties with 12% per annum interest if the Apex Court appeals are dismissed.

SAT-appeal

Failure to disclose material information in the offer document and misuse/routing of IPO proceeds through a loan to RDB Realty & Infrastructure Ltd., allegedly violating ICDR and PFUTP requirements; Baid separately breached Clause 49 by chairing the Audit Committee.
Appeals against the AO's common order dated 06.08.2014 were disposed of. · Joint and several aggregate penalty of Rs. 3 crore under Sections 15HA and 15HB was upheld.
Appeal: Appeal Nos. 404, 403, 402 and 432 of 2014 decided by SAT on 26 July 2016; related appeals against the WTM order dated 19.12.2014 were stated to be heard along with these appeals.
Suppression of material facts from investors in the IPO and misuse of IPO proceeds, violating the ICDR and PFUTP Regulations.
Appeals Nos. 514, 532, 533 and 534 of 2015 dismissed as infructuous. · WTM finding of violations of the ICDR and PFUTP Regulations upheld.
Appeal: Appeal Nos. 514, 532, 533 and 534 of 2015 dismissed as infructuous on 26 July 2016; common WTM order dated 19 December 2014 otherwise upheld.
Suppressing material facts from investors in IPO violating ICDR Regulations and misutilizing IPO proceeds violating PFUTP Regulations
Upheld WTM finding that appellants violated ICDR and PFUTP Regulations per Appeal No.404/2014 · Declined to decide validity of two additional charges as debarment already undergone
Appeal: Appeal Nos.514, 532, 533, 534 of 2015 dismissed as infructuous on 26.07.2016; related Appeal No.404 of 2014 decided 26.07.2016
SAT matter SATV-462688DF1B8C93D4C7DD8C07
Stay of the SAT order dated 26 July 2016 was refused. · SEBI may recover the penalties with 12% per annum interest if the Apex Court appeals are dismissed.
Appeal: Applicants stated that appeals against the SAT decision dated 26 July 2016 had been filed before the Apex Court and were pending; no appeal numbers or disposal details stated.
Suppressing material facts from investors in IPO violating ICDR Regulations and misutilising IPO proceeds violating PFUTP Regulations.
Upheld WTM finding that appellants violated ICDR and PFUTP Regulations for reasons in Appeal No. 404 of 2014 · Disposed of Appeal Nos. 514, 532, 533, 534 of 2015 as infructuous as 4-year debarment already undergone
Appeal: Appeal Nos. 514, 532, 533, 534 of 2015 (reserved 14.07.2016) dismissed as infructuous on 26.07.2016; companion Appeal No. 404 of 2014 decided 26.07.2016
Suppressing material facts from investors in IPO violating ICDR Regulations and misutilizing IPO proceeds violating PFUTP Regulations.
Upheld WTM finding that appellants violated ICDR and PFUTP Regulations · Dismissed Appeal Nos. 514, 532, 533, 534 of 2015 as infructuous as 4-year debarment already undergone
Appeal: Appeal Nos. 514, 532, 533 and 534 of 2015 disposed on 26.07.2016 as dismissed as infructuous

Analyse these matters in Ontology · Plans

Source: SecMarx — RDB Rasayans Ltd.. 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.