First | Prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | Last |
Documents Found: 87 |
Title |
Forum |
Year |
SEBI vs Kishore R. Ajmera
Justification in interfering with penalty: Absence of direct proof showing involvement of sub-broker-Degree of proof required to hold brokers or sub-brokers liable for fraudulent or manipulative practices-Whether the tribunal was justified in interfering with penalty by holding that in the absence of any direct proof or evidence showing the involvement [LexDoc Id : 494368]
|
SC |
2016 |
Bipin Jayant Thaker and Ors. vs SEBI
[LexDoc Id : 494310]
|
SAT (Mumbai) |
2016 |
Omkam Commodities (P) Ltd. vs SEBI
[LexDoc Id : 494314]
|
SAT (Mumbai) |
2016 |
Falcon Tyres Ltd. and Ors. vs SEBI
Securities and Exchange Board of India Act 1992: Imposition of maximum penalty under section 15HB-Statement of appellants in relation to minutes of meeting not disbelieved, No finding recorded on subsequent statement, Impugned order set aside-Whether the assessing officer was justified in imposing maximum penalty of Rs.1 crore imposable under section 15HB of the Securities and Exchange Boar [LexDoc Id : 494313]
|
SAT (Mumbai) |
2016 |
Vijay J. Thakkar vs SEBI
SEBI Act 1992: Justification for imposition of penalty-Lesser penalty imposed on similarly situated persons without any justification, Impugned order set aside-Whether imposition of penalty on the appellant for violating the provisions contained in the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Prohibition of Fr [LexDoc Id : 494226]
|
SAT (Mumbai) |
2016 |
Royal Twinkle Star Club Private Ltd. and Ors. vs SEBI
Restrain order: Schemes closed long before issuance of show cause notice-Schemes closed voluntarily, Substantial amount refunded to investors, Time to repay dues to members extended-Whether the order mainly restraining the appellant from collecting any money from investors or from launching or carrying on any Collective Investment [LexDoc Id : 493606]
|
SAT (Mumbai) |
2016 |
Citrus Check Inns Ltd. and Ors. vs SEBI
Continuance of directions contained in ex-parte interim order: Companies having completely different and exclusive legal identities-Appellant's undertakings on oath, Direction to make a without prejudice application seeking registration-Whether SEBI by its confirmatory order was justified in continuing the directions contained in the ex-parte interim order until further orders and in [LexDoc Id : 493603]
|
SAT (Mumbai) |
2016 |
Ankur Chaturvedi and Brijlaxmi Leasing and Finance Ltd. vs SEBI
[LexDoc Id : 493602]
|
SAT (Mumbai) |
2016 |
Thyrocare Diagnostics (P) Ltd. vs SEBI
[LexDoc Id : 493353]
|
SAT (Mumbai) |
2016 |
Vibgyor Allied Infrastructure Ltd., Rabindra Nath Dey, Raja Bhadra and Rana Bhadra vs SEBI
[LexDoc Id : 493076]
|
SAT (Mumbai) |
2016 |
Vasudev Ramchandra Kamat, Ketan Babulal Shah and Jigar Praful Ghoghari vs SEBI
[LexDoc Id : 493075]
|
SAT (Mumbai) |
2016 |
Nirmal Singh Bhangoo vs SEBI
[LexDoc Id : 492520]
|
SAT (Mumbai) |
2016 |
|
First | Prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | Last |
|