Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Case Laws Manuals Short Notes Articles SMS News Highlights
        Home        
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

Shri Dave Harihar Kiritbhai and Others Versus Securities and Exchange Board of India, Mumbai and anothers

2015 (7) TMI 101 - SECURITIES APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI

Application for review of Tribunal order - Held that:- It was argued by the respondent that none of two tests, viz. error manifest on face of judgment or discovery of new facts, exist in present case and hence there is no case for review. This Tribunal has considered the arguments of both Counsel and after thoughtful consideration is of the view that none of the tests of review is present in R.A. under consideration and accordingly R.A. is not allowed and request of Ld. Counsel for Appellant for .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ocate i/b K. Ashar & Co. Advocate Per : A.S. Lamba 1. Review Applications (RAs) have been filed by the Applicants/Original Appellants, viz. Review Application No.1 of 2015 in Appeal No.93 of 2014, Review Application No.2 of 2015 in Appeal No.104 of 2014, Review Application No.3 of 2015 in Appeal No.180 of 2014 and Review Application No.4 of 2015 in Appeal No.181 of 2014 for reviewing the Order dated 19/12/2014 passed by this Tribunal. The leading case of Dave Harihar Kiritbhai vs. SEBI was h .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

bull; Appellant was granted opportunity for personal hearing and thereafter confirmatory order was issued on 8/10/2012. • Appellant thereafter received SCN from Adjudication Officer (A.O.) under Rule 4(1) of SEBI (Procedure for Holding Inquiry and Imposing Penalties by Adjudicating Officer) Rules, 1995. • Appellant did not appear before A.O., but informed A.O. that his replies before WTM, SEBI wherein he was restrained from trading in securities market may be treated as his reply to SC .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

matter to A.O. for reconsideration of same, on basis of reply of Appellant, but since Appellant had not requested for remand and had chosen not to appear before A.O. and had furnished no reply to SCN, although he was provided opportunity for same and hence there was no violation of principle of natural justice and hence Tribunal considered the matter in appeal and decided to uphold the decision of A.O., arrived at on basis of documents available and taken into consideration by A.O. 3. Responden .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908) CP, while trying a suit, in respect of following matters: (e) reviewing its decisions. 5. Ld. Counsel for Respondent also stated that Hon ble Supreme Court had held in Ajit Kumar Rath vs. State of Orissa (1999) 9 Supreme Court Case 596 - The power (to review) can be exercised on the application of a person on the discovery of new and important matter or evidence which after the exercise of due diligence, was not within knowledge or could not be produced .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Discussion Forum
what is new what is new
 


Share:            

|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version