GST Course
CA Final Online Classes
CA Classes

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

Adjudication order in respect of Late Shri Sunil Kanti Kar in the matter of Alchemist Infra Realty Ltd

LinkedIn


Court :
SEBI

Brief :
Securities and Exchange Board of India (hereinafter referred to as ‘SEBI’) conducted an examination in the matter of fund mobilization by Alchemist Infra Realty Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as ‘AIRL’ / ‘Company’) to ascertain whether there was any violation of the provisions of Section 12(1B) of SEBI Act, 1992 and Regulation 3 of Securities and Exchange Board of India (Collective Investment Schemes) Regulations, 1999 (hereinafter referred to as ‘CIS Regulations’) by AIRL and its directors viz. Mr. Brij Mohan Mahajan, Mr. Narayan Madhav Kumar, Mr. Balvir Singh, Mr. Chandra Sekhar Chauhan, and Mr. Sunil Kanti Kar (hereinafter referred to as ‘Noticee’).

Citation :
[ADJUDICATION ORDER NO. Order/KS/AE/2020-21/9432]

BEFORE THE ADJUDICATING OFFICER
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA 
[ADJUDICATION ORDER NO. Order/KS/AE/2020-21/9432]

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

In respect of:
(Late) Shri Sunil Kanti Kar
House No. 14, South End Park, Lake,
Kolkata - 700029

In the matter of fund mobilization by Alchemist Infra Realty Ltd.

BACKGROUND

1. Securities and Exchange Board of India (hereinafter referred to as ‘SEBI’) conducted an examination in the matter of fund mobilization by Alchemist Infra Realty Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as ‘AIRL’ / ‘Company’) to ascertain whether there was any violation of the provisions of Section 12(1B) of SEBI Act, 1992 and Regulation 3 of Securities and Exchange Board of India (Collective Investment Schemes) Regulations, 1999 (hereinafter referred to as ‘CIS Regulations’) by AIRL and its directors viz. Mr. Brij Mohan Mahajan, Mr. Narayan Madhav Kumar, Mr. Balvir Singh, Mr. Chandra Sekhar Chauhan, and Mr. Sunil Kanti Kar (hereinafter referred to as ‘Noticee’).

2. Based on the examination, it was alleged that AIRL had floated some plans/ schemes, based on which it was collecting money from investors and purchasing large plots of land and developing the same. It was also inter alia observed that a certificate of Property was issued to the purchaser by AIRL, wherein the expected value of the said piece of land after the expiry of a fixed period of time has also been mentioned. Further, it was alleged that the agricultural land purchased by an investor/customer is managed on his behalf by AIRL and that investors/customers do not have day control over the agricultural land purchased by them.

To know more in details find the attachment file
 

 

Guest
on 28 October 2020
Published in LAW
Views : 19
downloaded 9 times
Report Abuse

LinkedIn







Trending Tags