Home Case Index All Cases Companies Law Companies Law + AT Companies Law - 2015 (4) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (4) TMI 483 - AT - Companies LawPenalty for Violation of regulation 13(3) of Securities and Exchange Board of India PIT (Prohibition of Insider Trading) Regulations, 1992 - Violation of regulation 29(2) of Securities and Exchange Board of India (Substantial Acquisition of Shares & Takeovers) Regulations, 2011 - Delay in making the relevant disclosures - Physical disability such as blindness can not be a excuse to escape from penal liability. Held that:- Penalty for delay in making disclosures under Section 15A(b) of SEBI Act, 1992 is ₹ 1 lac for each day during which such failure continues or ₹ 1 crore whichever is lower. Penalty calculated at the rate of ₹ 1 lac per day, in the present case, exceeds ₹ 1 crore. Thus, as against penalty of ₹ 1 crore imposable under Section 15A(b) of SEBI Act, 1992, adjudicating officer after considering all mitigating factors has imposed penalty of ₹ 5 lac which cannot be said to be excessively harsh or unreasonable. Argument that requisite particulars of sale in question were available on the website of the Stock Exchange and therefore for failure to make disclosures within the stipulated time penalty ought not to have been imposed, is without any merit, because, obligation to make disclosures within the stipulated time is a mandatory obligation and penalty is imposed for not complying with the mandatory obligation. Similarly argument that the failure to make disclosures within the stipulated time, was unintentional, technical or inadvertent and that no gain or unfair advantage has accrued to the appellant, is also without any merit, because, all these factors are mitigating factors and these factors do not obliterate the obligation to make disclosures. When a person dealing in shares in the stock market violates any of the regulatory provisions, then that person whether blind or not, cannot escape penal liability.After taking all mitigating factors, including the fact that the appellant is a blind person, the adjudicating officer has imposed penalty of ₹ 5 lac as against penalty of ₹ 1 crore imposable under SEBI Act, 1992, which cannot be said to be harsh or unreasonable. - Decided against the appellant.
|