Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 6 of 6 (0.23 seconds)

Hindustan Steel Ltd vs State Of Orissa on 4 August, 1969

Regarding the imposition of penalty the Senior Counsel for Appellant placed 7 reliance on Hon‟ble Supreme Court‟s decision in the matter of Hindustan Steel Ltd vs State of Orissa [(1969) 2 SCC 627] and this Tribunal‟s decision dated August 2, 2019 in the matter of P.G. Electroplast Ltd. & Ors. vs. SEBI, Appeal No. 281 of 2017 to state that even if minimum penalty is prescribed, the authority competent to impose the penalty will be justified in refusing to impose penalty, when there is a technical or venial breach of the provisions of the Act or where the breach flows from a bone fide belief that the offender is not liable to act in the manner prescribed by the statute.
Supreme Court of India Cites 11 - Cited by 1607 - J C Shah - Full Document

P. G. Electroplast Ltd. vs Sebi on 30 August, 2016

Regarding the imposition of penalty the Senior Counsel for Appellant placed 7 reliance on Hon‟ble Supreme Court‟s decision in the matter of Hindustan Steel Ltd vs State of Orissa [(1969) 2 SCC 627] and this Tribunal‟s decision dated August 2, 2019 in the matter of P.G. Electroplast Ltd. & Ors. vs. SEBI, Appeal No. 281 of 2017 to state that even if minimum penalty is prescribed, the authority competent to impose the penalty will be justified in refusing to impose penalty, when there is a technical or venial breach of the provisions of the Act or where the breach flows from a bone fide belief that the offender is not liable to act in the manner prescribed by the statute.
Securities Appellate Tribunal Cites 9 - Cited by 4 - J P Devadhar - Full Document
1