Tally
coaching
CA Classes

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

Adjudiation Order in the matter of Alang Industrial Gases Ltd.

LinkedIn


Court :
SEBI

Brief :
UNDER SECTION 15-I OF SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA ACT, 1992 READ WITH RULE 5 OF SEBI (PROCEDURE FOR HOLDING INQUIRY AND IMPOSING PENALTIES) RULES, 1995.

Citation :
ADJUDICATION ORDER: EAD-9/VKV/GSS/2020-21/9244-9245

BEFORE THE ADJUDICATING OFFICER
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA
[ADJUDICATION ORDER: EAD-9/VKV/GSS/2020-21/9244-9245]

UNDER SECTION 15-I OF SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA ACT, 1992 READ WITH RULE 5 OF SEBI (PROCEDURE FOR HOLDING INQUIRY AND IMPOSING PENALTIES) RULES, 1995.

BACKGROUND OF THE CASE

1. Securities and Exchange Board of India (hereinafter referred to as ‘SEBI’), conducted investigation in the scrip of Alang Industrial Gases Limited (hereinafter referred to as "Alang" or "the Target company"), a company listed on BSE limited (“BSE”) for the period July 09, 2012- May 23, 2014(“investigation period”), wherein disclosure violations were observed by the entities namely; Dilip Sheth (hereinafter referred to as Noticee no. 1 or by its individual name) and Alang Industrial Gases Limited (hereinafter referred to as Noticee no. 2 or "Alang" or "the Target company") jointly referred as Noticees, under Regulation 13(4) of SEBI (Prohibition of Insider Trading) Regulations 1992 (PIT Regulations) and Regulation 29(1) and 29(2) of SEBI (Substantial Acquisition of Shares and Takeovers) Regulations, 2011 (SAST Regulations) against Noticee no. 1 and under Regulation 13(6) of SEBI (Prohibition of Insider Trading) Regulations 1992 (PIT Regulations) against Noticee no. 2.

2. During the period of investigation, following was observed;

a. Shareholding of Mr. Dilip Seth had increased from 2,45,200 shares at the end of Quarter ending March 31, 2012 to 6,95,200 shares at the end of Quarter ending June 30, 2012. However, no disclosures in this regard were made by Mr. Dilip Seth, which was in violation of regulation 13 (4) of SEBI (PIT) Regulations 1992 and regulation 29 (1) and (2) of SEBI (SAST) Regulations, 2011.

b. The Target company failed to file disclosure with respect to information received under regulation 13 (1) of SEBI (PIT) Regulations 1992 by Mr. Dilip Seth which was in violation of regulation 13 (6) of SEBI (PIT) Regulations 1992.

APPOINTMENT OF ADJUDICATING OFFICER

3. Subsequently, vide communication order dated July 17, 2020, the undersigned was appointed as Adjudicating Officer in the matter under Section 15 I (1) of Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992 (“SEBI Act”) to inquire and adjudge the alleged violations and if satisfied that the Noticees are liable for imposition of penalty, may impose such penalty in terms of rule 5 of SEBI (Procedure for Holding Inquiry and imposing penalties) Rules, 1995 (hereinafter referred as ‘AO Rules’) and under the provisions of section 15A(b) of the SEBI Act.

To read more in details, find the enclosed file

 

Guest
on 30 September 2020
Published in LAW
Views : 13
downloaded 8 times
Report Abuse

LinkedIn







Trending Tags