Search Results for "SEBI disclosure"

90 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 90 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Holds Section 15J Factors Illustrative in SEBI Penalty Adjudication. Adjudicating Officer Retains Discretion to Consider Mitigating Circumstances Beyond Stipulated Factors Under SEBI Act.

The Supreme Court of India adjudicated a reference arising from multiple civil appeals concerning the interpretation of Section 15J of the Securities ...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Petition of Listed Company Seeking Copies of Seized Documents from GST Intelligence. Right to Copies Implicit Under CGST Act to Enable Compliance with SEBI Regulations and Audit Requirements.

The Petitioner, High Ground Enterprises Ltd., a company listed on the Bombay Stock Exchange and National Stock Exchange with over 10,000 shareholders,...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Upholds SEBI Order Against Corporate Giant in Futures Manipulation Case. The Court held that cornering 93.63% open interest through agents and dumping shares to depress settlement price constituted fraud under PFUTP Regulations.

The case involves appeals by Reliance Industries Limited (RIL) against orders of the Securities Appellate Tribunal (SAT) which upheld SEBI's findings ...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Considers Challenge to SBI Mutual Fund Merger and Directs SEBI Impleadment to Assess Regulatory Compliance. Court Examines Maintainability Under Article 226 and the Validity of Merger Based on Prevailing NAV Without Investor Meeting in Light of SEBI (Mutual Funds) Regulations, 1996.

The Petitioner, appearing in person, filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution challenging the merger of the SBI One India Fund with...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Quashes Reopening Notice Under Section 148 of Income Tax Act, 1961 for Venture Capital Fund — No Failure to Disclose Material Facts. Reopening Based on Mere Change of Opinion on Applicability of Section 10(23FB) Exemption is Invalid.

The petitioner, DHFL Venture Capital Fund, is a trust registered as a venture capital fund under SEBI (Venture Capital Fund) Regulations, 1996. It fil...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Promoter's Challenge to Pledge of Shares During Lock-In Period — Pledge Held Valid as Lock-In Restricts Transfer of Title, Not Interest. Court Rules That Pledge Under Section 172 of Contract Act Does Not Violate SEBI ICDR Regulations, 2009.

The plaintiff, Kannan Vishwanath, a promoter and managing director of Dr. Datson Labs Limited, filed a suit and notice of motion seeking a declaration...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Examines Section 34 Petitions Challenging Conflicting Stock Exchange Arbitral Awards. Court Focuses on Whether Same Arbitrator's Contradictory Findings on Identical Facts Vitiated Awards Under Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

Three petitions under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 were heard together by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, challeng...