SAT | Separate penalties by the stock exchanges can be imposed | While positing, rejects appeal
Securities Appellate Tribunal (SAT): A Coram of Tarun Agarwala, J., (Presiding Officer) and M.T. Joshi, J., (Judicial Member) while dismissing an appeal
Penalty
CESTAT | Penalty imposed under S. 112 read with S. 114AA of the Customs Act, 1962 set aside; Tribunal allows appeal stating absence of mens rea
Customs, Excise and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT): Ashok Jindal (Judicial Member) allowed an appeal which was filed against the impugned order
Del HC | Penalty imposed on CPIOs for “changing stands” leading to apprehension of mala fides and unreasonable conduct; Elaborate principles laid down for exercise of power by CPIOs
Delhi High Court: Prathiba M. Singh, J., upheld that order of the Central Information Commission whereby a penalty of Rs 10000 was
SEBI directs HDFC to deposit Rs 158.68 Crore in Escrow Account in BRH Wealth Kreators case; Penalty of Rs 1 Crore imposed
Security and Exchange Board of India (SEBI): G. Mahalingam (Whole Time Member) imposed a penalty of Rupees One Crore on HDFC Bank
Chh HC | Appeal under S. 30 of Employees’ Compensation Act, 1923 is to be entertained only on a question of law
Chhattisgarh High Court: A Division Bench of P.R. Ramchandra Menon and Parth Prateem Sahu JJ., dismissed the appeal being devoid of merits.
CESTAT | Demand of reversal Cenvat Credit, Interest, and Imposition of penalty set aside; Tribunal allows appeal in matter of Central Excise (Removal of Goods at Concessional Rate of Duty for Manufacture of Excisable Goods) Rule 2001
Customs, Excise and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT): The Coram of Ramesh Nair (Judicial Member) and Raju (Technical Member) allowed an appeal
CESTAT | Whether confiscation of goods and imposition of fine and penalty by the Lower Authority in absence of valid PSI certificate maintainable; Tribunal explains
Customs, Excise and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT): P.K. Choudhary (Judicial Member) partly allowed an appeal which was filed against the Order-in-Appeal
SEBI | Reliance Industries Ltd. and it’s MD Mukesh D. Ambani found indulged in fraudulent trade practises, an exemplary penalty of Rs 25 crore and 15 crore imposed respectively by SEBI
Security and Exchange Board of India (SEBI): B J Dilip, (Adjudicating Officer) imposed the penalty of 25 crores and 15 crore respectively
All HC | In case owner of vehicle does not intimate Insurance Company about the accident, can Insurance Company be exempted from paying interest? HC explains
Allahabad High Court: Dr Kaushal Jayendra Thaker, J., observed that if the insurance co. will not be liable to pay interest, then it
NCLAT | S. 65 of IBC is not meant to negate process under S. 7 or 9 of IBC; Penal action under S. 65 can be taken only when provision of Code has been invoked fraudulently, with malicious intent
National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT): The Bench of Justice Venugopal M. (Judicial Member) and V.P. Singh (Technical Member) and Shreesha Merla (Technical
Section 22 of MMDR Act does not bar Magistrate to direct registration of FIR under Section 156(3) CrPC; holds SC
The violators cannot be permitted to go scot free on payment of penalty only.
SAT | S. 15J SEBI Act, 1992 may not apply in adjudication proceedings involving penalty under S. 15A SEBI Act, 1992 while determining the quantum of penalty, Appeal allowed
Securities Appellate Tribunal (SAT): Justice Tarun Agarwal allowed the appeal and substituted the penalty imposed by the impugned order with a warning.
Raj HC | Petitioner not vigilant enough to seek his remedy, Court rejects Stay application
Rajasthan High Court: Arun Bhansali, J., rejected a stay application that was filed aggrieved by the order of the Director, Mines demanding
CESTAT | Service Tax Penalty of Rs 1,03,83,141 set aside completely; Tribunal allowed appeal
Customs, Excise and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT): A Division Bench of Anil Choudhary (Judicial Member) and P. Venkata Subba Rao (Technical
Delhi High Court stays Anti Profiteering Penalty proceedings against Samsonite South Asia
Delhi High Court: A Division Bench of Manmohan and Sanjeev Narula, JJ., stayed the anti profiteering penalty proceedings against Samsonite South Asia
Lockdown | Period for filing ESI contribution for the month of February — extended to 15th May, 2020
Extension of time in filing ESI contribution As a relief measure, the period for filing ESI contribution for the month of February
CESTAT | Penalty cannot be imposed upon a corporate body under Rule 26; order imposing penalty set aside
Customs, Excise and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT): Anil Choudhary (Judicial member) allowed an appeal filed against a common impugned Order-in-Appeal. The
SAT | Company floating CIS without registering with SEBI held liable under S. 15-HA of SEBI Act
Securities Appellate Tribunal (SAT): A Two-Member Bench of Justice Tarun Agarwala (Presiding Officer) and Justice M.T. Joshi (Judicial Member) was hearing two
SAT | In cases where penalty is imposed for wrongly reporting margin short fall, same cannot be modified on submission that such reporting was merely a technical error
Securities Appellate Tribunal (SAT): The Coram of Justice Tarun Agarwala, (Presiding Officer) and Justice M. T. Joshi (Judicial Member), and Dr C.