9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (12) TMI 761X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appellant should have fully co-operated with the Investigating Officer appointed by the SEBI – Penalty is reduced to Rupees Two Lakhs – Decided Partly in favour of Appellant. - 93 of 2013 - - - Dated:- 1-7-2013 - JOG SINGH AND A.S. LAMBA, JJ. For the Appellant : S.K. Jain and Jagannath Kar. For the Respondent : Prateek Seksaria, Mihir Mody and Akhilesh Singh. ORDER: PER : Jog Singh The present appeal has been filed against an order dated February 28, 2013 passed by the Adjudicating Officer imposing a penalty of Rs.5,00,000 on the appellant under section 15A(a) of the SEBI Act, 1992 for violation of sections 11C(2) and 11C(3) of the SEBI Act. 2. Brief facts leading to the case are as follows. M/s. Parag Vanijya Priv ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ness Private Limited (Ramji) vii. Ramkrishna Fabrication and Machineries Private Limited (Ramkrishna) viii. Runicha Alloys And Steel Private Limited (Runicha) ix. Simple Mining And Power Private Limited (Simple) x. Taitan Management Services Private Limited (Taitan) 4. The reference made by the ITD stated that none of the dummy companies had proper offices and that the directors of these dummy companies were of no means to carry out huge transactions running into millions of rupees. As per the said reference, ITD conducted survey under Section 133A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 at the premises of the dummy companies and found that the companies were not traceable at their given addresses. ITD also forwarded certa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... estigations in various scrips and noticing that such operations were possibly continuing in the market to the detriment of the investing public, SEBI passed an ad-interim ex-parte order dated December 2, 2010, issuing directions against, inter alia, Mr. Sanjay Dangi, his associates and promoter entities of 4 companies, i.e. MIL, Hubtown, WCL BIL restraining 10 Dangi entities and 14 Ashika entities from accessing the securities market and further prohibited from buying, selling or dealing in securities in any manner whatsoever, till further directions. From the bank statements of Ramji, Runicha, Ambaji, Kanhaiya and Inco it was observed that these companies had availed loans from SICOM Limited (SIMCO) to make the payments to "MIL" for conv ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... BI Act, 1992 and thereby imposed a monetary penalty of Rs.5 lac (Rupees Five Lakh only). Hence this appeal. 7. With the consent of both the parties, the appeal is taken up for final hearing at the admission stage itself and is being disposed of by the present order. Heard both the learned counsel Mr. S.K. Jain for the appellant and Mr. Prateek Seksaria with Mr. Mihir Mody and Mr. Akhilesh Singh, learned counsel for the Respondent. It is vehemently argued by Shri S.K. Jain that the appellant is not responsible to pay the penalty imposed on it by impugned order dated 28th February, 2013 for violation of the provisions of sections 11C(2) and 11C(3) of the SEBI Act, 1992. The said penalty has been imposed by the learned Adjudicating Officer u ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
