The appellate authority found that the company complied with private placement provisions by safeguarding funds in a separate account. The ROC’s penalty order was set aside. The decision highlights evidentiary verification as key in adjudication proceedings.
The issue involved alleged violation in handling share application money under company law. The ruling held that maintaining funds in a separate account ensured compliance, leading to penalty removal.
The issue involved alleged misuse of share application funds under company law provisions. The authority ruled that compliance was established through proper bank account usage, leading to penalty removal.
The issue involved providing paid stock tips and trading advice without SEBI registration. SEBI held such activities illegal and ordered refunds with penalties. The key takeaway is that unregistered advisory services attract strict regulatory action.
The Authority found that core survey functions were carried out by unlicensed personnel. It held that such outsourcing violated regulatory norms and warranted licence cancellation.
The regulator cancelled a surveyor’s licence after finding false records, mismatched filings, and inaccurate disclosures. The ruling highlights strict compliance expectations in maintaining survey data.
The case involved submission of a forged diploma for obtaining and renewing a licence. The Authority held that continued reliance on a known fake document amounted to misrepresentation and cancelled the licence.
The issue involved non-filing of Form DIR-12 for appointment of a director. The authority held that failure to comply with Section 170(2) attracts penalty regardless of operational or technical challenges. The ruling emphasizes strict compliance with statutory filing requirements.
The issue involved non-filing of Form DIR-12 to report resignation of a director. The authority held that failure to comply with Section 168(1) attracts penalty despite operational or technical challenges. The ruling emphasizes mandatory compliance with director-related filings.
The issue involved omission of allottee occupation details in Form PAS-3. The authority held that Rule 12(2) mandates complete disclosure, and non-compliance attracts penalty. The ruling emphasizes accuracy in statutory filings.
