Sanjeev Bansal
Penalties and directions recorded
- Appeal No. 293 of 2016 dismissed with no order as to costs, AO penalty of Rs 1 lakh upheld
SAT-appeal
- SAT matter SATV-57F1461B28E684B46A0F2518Appeal No. 293 of 2016 dismissed for want of prosecution with no order as to costsAppeal: Appeal No. 293 of 2016 dismissed for want of prosecution on 09.12.2016
- SAT matter SATV-E7221A744E92572F74D4F58EAppeal disposed by applying same order as in Appeal No. 13 of 2009 decided on 5.10.2009Appeal: Appeal No. 31 of 2009 decided on 5.10.2009 - disposed per order in Appeal No. 13 of 2009
- Making incorrect statement to SEBI investigating authority in violation of Section 11C(3) and 11C(5) by denying dealing in SRG Infotech scrip on behalf of Arihant.Misc. Application No. 380 of 2016 allowed, order dated 9 December 2016 recalled and Appeal No. 293 of 2016 restored · Appeal No. 293 of 2016 dismissed with no order as to costs, AO penalty of Rs 1 lakh upheld
- Collusive price rigging and creation of artificial volumes in scrip of SRG Infotech Ltd through manipulative trades by New Age and Arihant.Guilt of Pramod Jain for manipulative trades upheld · Debarment from accessing securities market reduced from six months to four monthsAppeal: Appeal No. 140 of 2008 decided on 15.7.2009 - disposed with modification reducing debarment to four months
Source: SecMarx — Sanjeev Bansal. 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.