Sapna Ramdas Jatwal

SAT-appeal

• Alleged price manipulation, artificial volume and creation of a false and misleading appearance of trading in Gromo's scrip; Gromo also allegedly failed to disclose utilization/non-utilization of preferential allotment proceeds under Clause 43.
  Appeals challenged the common AO order dated 17 May 2021. · Penalty of Rs. 5 lakh against Gromo was sustained, but the statutory basis was read as Section 23A(a) of the SCRA rather than Section 23E.
  Appeal: Appeal Nos. 496, 518, 519, 580, 658 of 2021, 87 of 2022, 131 of 2022 and 481 of 2022 were heard together; hearing on 3 March 2023 and decision dated 5 June 2023. The provided text does not state final disposal of each appeal.
• SAT matter SATV-1BD46E7EF8A586B19BF1CD59
  Appeal dismissed for want of prosecution
  Appeal: Appeal No. 131 of 2022 dismissed on 05 April 2022 for want of prosecution
• SAT matter SATV-26EECF2EC93A0380A63A9C32
  Order reserved in the listed appeals and connected miscellaneous applications · Parties may file written submissions within one week
  Appeal: Appeal Nos. 496, 518, 519, 580 and 658 of 2021; Appeal Nos. 87, 131 and 481 of 2022; order reserved on 3 March 2023
• SAT matter SATV-24F207D099DA590F9F267309
  Order reserved in the connected appeals and miscellaneous applications · Parties permitted to file written submissions within one week
  Appeal: Appeal Nos. 496, 518, 519, 580, 658 of 2021, 87, 131 and 481 of 2022 were heard; order reserved on 3 March 2023
• SAT matter SATV-28EAA0F0712942A49A2344D9
  Order dated 5 April 2022 recalled · Restoration application allowed and Appeal No. 131 of 2022 restored
  Appeal: Miscellaneous Application No. 301 of 2022 allowed; Appeal No. 131 of 2022 restored on 12 May 2022
• Alleged price manipulation, creation of false and misleading appearance of trading and artificial volumes in Gromo's scrip through coordinated trades and higher-than-LTP orders; Gromo was also alleged to have failed to disclose utilization or non-utilization of preferential-allotment proceeds under Clause 43.
  Appeals against the common AO order dated 17 May 2021 were considered; the extracted text does not include the final dispositive paragraph. · Penalty of Rs. 5 lakh on Gromo was treated as imposed under Section 23A(a) of the SCRA instead of Section 23E.
  Appeal: Appeal Nos. 496, 518, 519, 580, 658 of 2021, 87 of 2022, 131 of 2022 and 481 of 2022; hearing on 3 March 2023. Decision dated 5 June 2023; final disposal is not included in the extracted text.
• SAT matter SATV-323018966872F72270B66F80
  Order reserved · Parties permitted to file written submissions within one week
  Appeal: Multiple connected appeals heard; order reserved on 3 March 2023, including Appeals Nos. 496, 518, 519, 580, 658 of 2021, 87, 131 and 481 of 2022
• SAT matter SATV-9651A0C33C341EF6FC4B120D
  Order reserved after hearing learned counsel for parties · Written submissions, if any, may be filed by parties within a week
• SAT matter SATV-F9306A011112C7A26F8CFE1E
  Heard counsel for parties and reserved order · Written submissions may be filed within a week
  Appeal: Appeal Nos. 496, 518, 519, 580, 658 of 2021 and 87, 131, 481 of 2022 heard on 03.03.2023; order reserved, not disposed
• Price manipulation and creation of a false and misleading appearance of trading in Gromo's scrip through coordinated trades and higher-than-LTP orders; Gromo was also alleged to have failed to disclose utilization of preferential-allotment proceeds.
  Appeals challenged the common AO order dated 17 May 2021 imposing penalties on 12 of 21 noticees. · Penalty of Rs. 5 lakh against Gromo for Clause 43 violation was sustained, but deemed imposed under Section 23A(a), not Section 23E.
  Appeal: Appeal Nos. 496, 518, 519, 580 and 658 of 2021, Appeal No. 87 of 2022, Appeal No. 131 of 2022 and Appeal No. 481 of 2022; hearing on 3 March 2023 and decision dated 5 June 2023; excerpt does not state complete disposal result