SEBI BARS FORMER TATA FINANCE MD FROM CAPITAL MARKETS FOR 2 YEARSThe
Securities and Exchange Board of India ( Sebi) on Monday barred Dilip
Pendse, former managing director of erstwhile Tata Finance, for two
years from the securities market on charges of involvement in fraudulent
and unfair trade practices in four firms, including Telco ( now Tata
Motors) and Infosys, more than 10 years
ago. In its order, Sebi said it had restrained " Dilip S Pendse from accessing the capital market and prohibit him from buying, selling or otherwise dealing in the securities market, directly or indirectly, for a period of two years." The market regulator had conducted a probe into the dealings of one Inshaallah Investments in the scrips of Himachal Futuristic Corp ( HFCL), Tata Engineering and Locomotive Company Ltd ( Telco), Infosys and Software Solutions India Ltd ( SSI) following a complaint by Tata Finance in 2002. The complaint alleged that there were certain illegal carry forward transactions in these scrips at the behest of Pendse in 2001. Further, the transactions were executed on behalf of Inshaallah, in which a Tata Finance subsidiary, Niskalp Investment and Trading Company Ltd, had vital financial interest. It was stated in the complaint that Pendse was the director in both Niskalp and Inshaallah. It was alleged that Pendse, in association with two brokers — Jhunjhunwala Stockbrokers and Pratik Stock Vision — executed the transactions. Sebi said Inshaallah had agreed to buy a specific quantity of shares of HFCL, TELCO, Infosys and SSI on ` Principal to Principal' basis at specified prices on various dates. Interestingly, on the same day Anjudi Property agreed to sell a similar quantity of shares of these companies on `principal to principal basis' at price very close to the prices given by Inshaallah. Later, it was found instead of settling these carry forward positions on the market, the shares were sold by Anjudi Property to the brokers on ` principal to principal' basis. Sebi said such transaction could not be said to be valid, as under the normal circumstances, the brokers should not have purchased shares not in possession of Anjudi Property. It also said the brokers should not have sold similar quantities of shares to Inshaallah as they were not in the possession of such number of shares. Pendse had submitted before Sebi there had been an inordinate delay in the proceedings, but the regulator said " the proceedings have been prolonged as the investigation had to deal with complex facts and records. "After the issuance of SCN ( show- cause notice), the inspection of the documents also consumed time. However, delay cannot be a ground for exoneration," Sebi's whole- time member Prashant Saran said in his order. – www.business-standard.com
ago. In its order, Sebi said it had restrained " Dilip S Pendse from accessing the capital market and prohibit him from buying, selling or otherwise dealing in the securities market, directly or indirectly, for a period of two years." The market regulator had conducted a probe into the dealings of one Inshaallah Investments in the scrips of Himachal Futuristic Corp ( HFCL), Tata Engineering and Locomotive Company Ltd ( Telco), Infosys and Software Solutions India Ltd ( SSI) following a complaint by Tata Finance in 2002. The complaint alleged that there were certain illegal carry forward transactions in these scrips at the behest of Pendse in 2001. Further, the transactions were executed on behalf of Inshaallah, in which a Tata Finance subsidiary, Niskalp Investment and Trading Company Ltd, had vital financial interest. It was stated in the complaint that Pendse was the director in both Niskalp and Inshaallah. It was alleged that Pendse, in association with two brokers — Jhunjhunwala Stockbrokers and Pratik Stock Vision — executed the transactions. Sebi said Inshaallah had agreed to buy a specific quantity of shares of HFCL, TELCO, Infosys and SSI on ` Principal to Principal' basis at specified prices on various dates. Interestingly, on the same day Anjudi Property agreed to sell a similar quantity of shares of these companies on `principal to principal basis' at price very close to the prices given by Inshaallah. Later, it was found instead of settling these carry forward positions on the market, the shares were sold by Anjudi Property to the brokers on ` principal to principal' basis. Sebi said such transaction could not be said to be valid, as under the normal circumstances, the brokers should not have purchased shares not in possession of Anjudi Property. It also said the brokers should not have sold similar quantities of shares to Inshaallah as they were not in the possession of such number of shares. Pendse had submitted before Sebi there had been an inordinate delay in the proceedings, but the regulator said " the proceedings have been prolonged as the investigation had to deal with complex facts and records. "After the issuance of SCN ( show- cause notice), the inspection of the documents also consumed time. However, delay cannot be a ground for exoneration," Sebi's whole- time member Prashant Saran said in his order. – www.business-standard.com
No comments:
Post a Comment