Home Case Index All Cases Companies Law Companies Law + AT Companies Law - 2013 (12) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2013 (12) TMI 1475 - AT - Companies LawPenalty u/s 15HB & Section 15A(a) of SEBI Act, 1992 - Charges of trading as sub-broker with out registration - Non compliance of summons - Held that:- Charges of trading as sub-broker with out registration - Firstly appellant had commenced trading on behalf of her clients admittedly w.e.f. 15th December, 2006 i.e. prior to making application for registration as sub-broker on 18.12.2006 which was not even permitted under 1992 Rules. Secondly, 1992 Rules have been rescinded by notification dated 07.09.2006 w.e.f. 07.09.2006. Therefore, appellant who had applied for registration as sub-broker on 18.12.2006 could not have carried on trade as sub-broker neither under SEBI (Stock-Broker and Sub-Broker) Regulations, 1992 (“1992 Regulations” for short) nor under 1992 Rules which was rescinded w.e.f. 07.09.2006. Therefore, the decision of AO that the appellant had traded as sub-broker in violation of Regulation 11(1) of 1992 Regulations which prohibits trading in securities without being registered as sub-broker, cannot be faulted. Non compliance of summons - First ground of AO that the appellant failed to furnish copy of income tax returns for Assessment Year 2006-2007 is contrary to facts on record, because, from appellant’s letter dated 07.09.2009 , it is seen that the appellant had forwarded the income tax return for Assessment Year 2006-2007 along with letter dated 07.09.2009. No grievance was made at any time by the investigating authority that the letter dated 07.09.2009 was received without income tax return for Assessment Year 2006-2007. Also it is evident that certain documents which were specifically sought through the summonses have not been furnished. Counsel for appellant could not demonstrate that all the documents were in fact furnished by the appellant. In these circumstances, finding of AO that the appellant failed to furnish documents inspite of serving summonses cannot be faulted. - However since AO has erroneously held that the appellant has failed to furnish income tax return for Assessment Year 2006-2007, in our opinion, it would be just and proper to sustain penalty under Section 15A (a) to the extent of ₹ 1 lac. - Decided partly in favour of the appellant.
|