The Adjudicating Officer investigated Manoj Shah for allegedly engaging in fraudulent trades that created artificial volume and manipulated the price of Adani Exports Ltd stock between 2004 and 2005. After considering evidence of synchronized trades without beneficial ownership changes, the Officer determined Shah violated securities market regulations. Shah was fined 200,000 rupees for his role in the fraudulent trading scheme.
The document is an adjudication order from the Securities and Exchange Board of India imposing a monetary penalty on Shri Nrupesh C. Shah for fraudulent trading in the shares of Adani Exports Ltd. The order finds that Mr. Shah engaged in reversal trades without real change in beneficial ownership, creating artificial volume and misleading the market. While Mr. Shah requested extensions and consented to proceedings, he did not ultimately file a reply to the show cause notice. Based on the evidence, the adjudicating officer concludes Mr. Shah violated securities market regulations and imposes a penalty of 500,000 Indian rupees.
Adjudication Order against Shri Nrupesh C. Shah in the matter of Adani Export...Hindenburg Research
The document is an adjudication order from the Securities and Exchange Board of India imposing a monetary penalty on Shri Nrupesh C. Shah for fraudulent trading in the shares of Adani Exports Ltd. The order finds that Mr. Shah executed reversal trades without real change in beneficial ownership, creating artificial volume and misleading the market. While Mr. Shah did not provide any explanation, his trading pattern showed trades were not intended to transfer ownership but rather inflate prices. As such, the order concludes Mr. Shah violated securities market regulations and imposes a penalty of 500,000 Indian rupees.
The document is an adjudication order from the Securities and Exchange Board of India imposing a monetary penalty on Shri Nrupesh C. Shah for fraudulent trading in shares of Adani Exports Ltd. The order finds that Mr. Shah engaged in reversal trades without real change in beneficial ownership, creating artificial volume and misleading the market. While Mr. Shah requested extensions and consented to proceedings, he did not file a substantive reply. Considering the fraudulent trading and lack of explanation, the adjudicating officer imposed a penalty of 500,000 Indian rupees.
The Adjudicating Officer at the Securities and Exchange Board of India investigated Mahesh Bissa for allegedly engaging in fraudulent and manipulative trading in the shares of Adani Exports Ltd. during 2004-2005. While Bissa did not respond to the allegations, he admitted to the trading during a hearing. The Officer found that Bissa executed large reversal trades with only a few counterparties, creating artificial volume without real ownership changes. As violations were established, the Officer imposed a monetary penalty of 500,000 rupees on Bissa under the relevant SEBI regulations and acts.
Adjudication Order against Shri Mahesh H. Bissa in the matter of Adani Export...Hindenburg Research
The Adjudicating Officer at the Securities and Exchange Board of India investigated Mahesh Bissa for allegedly engaging in fraudulent and manipulative trading in the shares of Adani Exports Ltd. during 2004-2005. While Bissa did not respond to the allegations, he admitted to the trading during a hearing. The Officer found that Bissa executed large reversal trades with only a few counterparties, creating artificial volume without real ownership changes. As a result, the Officer concluded Bissa violated market manipulation regulations and imposed a monetary penalty of 500,000 rupees.
The document is an adjudication order from the Securities and Exchange Board of India imposing a monetary penalty on Jitesh Seth for fraudulent trading activities. The order finds that Seth engaged in synchronized and reversal trades of shares in Adani Exports Ltd, creating artificial volume and manipulating the stock price without real transfer of ownership. Based on analysis of trading patterns and in line with precedents, the order concludes Seth violated market regulations. A penalty of 100,000 rupees is imposed, considering the available information on gains/losses.
Adjudication Order against Shri Jitesh Seth in the matter of Adani Exports Lt...Hindenburg Research
The document is an adjudication order from the Securities and Exchange Board of India imposing a monetary penalty on Jitesh Seth for fraudulent trading activities. The order finds that Seth engaged in synchronized and reversal trades of shares in Adani Exports Ltd, creating artificial volume and manipulating the stock price without real transfer of ownership. As a result, Seth violated securities market regulations. Considering the available evidence and factors, the adjudicating officer imposed a penalty of 100,000 Indian rupees.
The document is an adjudication order from the Securities and Exchange Board of India imposing a monetary penalty on Sunil Kuril for fraudulent trading. The order found that Kuril executed a large number of reversal trades in Adani Exports Ltd shares, creating artificial volume and misleading appearances without real changes in ownership. This violated regulations against fraudulent and unfair trading practices. Based on the evidence, the adjudicating officer imposed a penalty of 100,000 rupees on Kuril for his violations.
The document is an adjudication order from the Securities and Exchange Board of India imposing a monetary penalty on Shri Nrupesh C. Shah for fraudulent trading in the shares of Adani Exports Ltd. The order finds that Mr. Shah engaged in reversal trades without real change in beneficial ownership, creating artificial volume and misleading the market. While Mr. Shah requested extensions and consented to proceedings, he did not ultimately file a reply to the show cause notice. Based on the evidence, the adjudicating officer concludes Mr. Shah violated securities market regulations and imposes a penalty of 500,000 Indian rupees.
Adjudication Order against Shri Nrupesh C. Shah in the matter of Adani Export...Hindenburg Research
The document is an adjudication order from the Securities and Exchange Board of India imposing a monetary penalty on Shri Nrupesh C. Shah for fraudulent trading in the shares of Adani Exports Ltd. The order finds that Mr. Shah executed reversal trades without real change in beneficial ownership, creating artificial volume and misleading the market. While Mr. Shah did not provide any explanation, his trading pattern showed trades were not intended to transfer ownership but rather inflate prices. As such, the order concludes Mr. Shah violated securities market regulations and imposes a penalty of 500,000 Indian rupees.
The document is an adjudication order from the Securities and Exchange Board of India imposing a monetary penalty on Shri Nrupesh C. Shah for fraudulent trading in shares of Adani Exports Ltd. The order finds that Mr. Shah engaged in reversal trades without real change in beneficial ownership, creating artificial volume and misleading the market. While Mr. Shah requested extensions and consented to proceedings, he did not file a substantive reply. Considering the fraudulent trading and lack of explanation, the adjudicating officer imposed a penalty of 500,000 Indian rupees.
The Adjudicating Officer at the Securities and Exchange Board of India investigated Mahesh Bissa for allegedly engaging in fraudulent and manipulative trading in the shares of Adani Exports Ltd. during 2004-2005. While Bissa did not respond to the allegations, he admitted to the trading during a hearing. The Officer found that Bissa executed large reversal trades with only a few counterparties, creating artificial volume without real ownership changes. As violations were established, the Officer imposed a monetary penalty of 500,000 rupees on Bissa under the relevant SEBI regulations and acts.
Adjudication Order against Shri Mahesh H. Bissa in the matter of Adani Export...Hindenburg Research
The Adjudicating Officer at the Securities and Exchange Board of India investigated Mahesh Bissa for allegedly engaging in fraudulent and manipulative trading in the shares of Adani Exports Ltd. during 2004-2005. While Bissa did not respond to the allegations, he admitted to the trading during a hearing. The Officer found that Bissa executed large reversal trades with only a few counterparties, creating artificial volume without real ownership changes. As a result, the Officer concluded Bissa violated market manipulation regulations and imposed a monetary penalty of 500,000 rupees.
The document is an adjudication order from the Securities and Exchange Board of India imposing a monetary penalty on Jitesh Seth for fraudulent trading activities. The order finds that Seth engaged in synchronized and reversal trades of shares in Adani Exports Ltd, creating artificial volume and manipulating the stock price without real transfer of ownership. Based on analysis of trading patterns and in line with precedents, the order concludes Seth violated market regulations. A penalty of 100,000 rupees is imposed, considering the available information on gains/losses.
Adjudication Order against Shri Jitesh Seth in the matter of Adani Exports Lt...Hindenburg Research
The document is an adjudication order from the Securities and Exchange Board of India imposing a monetary penalty on Jitesh Seth for fraudulent trading activities. The order finds that Seth engaged in synchronized and reversal trades of shares in Adani Exports Ltd, creating artificial volume and manipulating the stock price without real transfer of ownership. As a result, Seth violated securities market regulations. Considering the available evidence and factors, the adjudicating officer imposed a penalty of 100,000 Indian rupees.
The document is an adjudication order from the Securities and Exchange Board of India imposing a monetary penalty on Sunil Kuril for fraudulent trading. The order found that Kuril executed a large number of reversal trades in Adani Exports Ltd shares, creating artificial volume and misleading appearances without real changes in ownership. This violated regulations against fraudulent and unfair trading practices. Based on the evidence, the adjudicating officer imposed a penalty of 100,000 rupees on Kuril for his violations.
Adjudication Order against Shri Sunil Kuril in the matter of Adani Exports Lt...Hindenburg Research
The document is an adjudication order from the Securities and Exchange Board of India imposing a monetary penalty on Sunil Kuril for fraudulent trading. The order found that Kuril executed a large number of reversal trades in Adani Exports Ltd shares, creating artificial volume and price manipulation without real change in ownership. This violated securities market regulations. Based on the evidence, the adjudicating officer imposed a penalty of 100,000 rupees on Kuril for the fraudulent trading.
Adjudication Order against Shri Santosh Gade in the matter of Adani Exports L...Hindenburg Research
The Securities and Exchange Board of India investigated trading in the shares of Adani Exports Ltd during two periods and found that Santosh Gade had engaged in fraudulent trades that created artificial volume and distorted the market price. Gade traded heavily through two brokers and engaged in synchronized and reversal trades without real change in ownership. As Gade did not respond to the show cause notice, the adjudicating officer concluded Gade violated market manipulation regulations and imposed a monetary penalty of 100,000 rupees.
The Securities and Exchange Board of India investigated trading in the shares of Adani Exports Ltd during two periods and found that Santosh Gade engaged in fraudulent trades that created artificial volume and distorted the market price. Gade executed large numbers of reversal trades without real change in ownership and also traded with himself through different brokers, indicating fictitious trades. As Gade did not respond to the show cause notice, he was found to have violated securities market regulations. An adjudicating officer imposed a monetary penalty of 100,000 rupees on Gade for his fraudulent trading practices.
Adjudication Order against Shri Sunil Purohit in the matter of Adani Exports ...Hindenburg Research
The document is an adjudication order from the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) against Sunil Purohit for alleged violations of securities trading regulations. SEBI investigated Purohit's trading in the shares of Adani Exports Ltd during two periods in 2004-2005 and found that his trades created artificial volume and prices without real change in ownership. Purohit did not respond to the show cause notice or request for a hearing. Based on evidence of reversal trades and circular trading, the adjudicating officer found Purohit guilty of fraudulent trades that violated securities market regulations.
The document is an adjudication order from the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) against Sunil Purohit for alleged violations of securities trading regulations. SEBI investigated Purohit's trading in the shares of Adani Exports Ltd during two periods in 2004-2005 and found that his trades created artificial volume and prices without real change in ownership. Purohit did not respond to the show cause notice or request for a hearing. Based on the evidence, the adjudicating officer found Purohit guilty of fraudulent trades that violated securities market regulations.
The document is an adjudication order from the Securities and Exchange Board of India imposing a monetary penalty on Haresh Posnak for fraudulent trading in shares of Adani Exports Ltd. The order finds that Posnak engaged in synchronized and reversal trades that created artificial volume and distorted the market price without any change in beneficial ownership. As Posnak did not respond to the allegations, the charges were deemed admitted. Considering the fraudulent nature of the trading and factors specified in the SEBI Act, a penalty of 100,000 rupees was imposed.
Adjudication Order against Shri Haresh Posnak in the matter of Adani Exports ...Hindenburg Research
The document is an adjudication order from the Securities and Exchange Board of India imposing a monetary penalty on Haresh Posnak for fraudulent trading in shares of Adani Exports Ltd. The order finds that Posnak engaged in synchronized and reversal trades that created artificial volume and distorted the market price without any change in beneficial ownership. As Posnak did not respond to the allegations, the charges were deemed admitted. Considering the fraudulent nature of the trading and factors specified in the SEBI Act, a penalty of 100,000 rupees was imposed.
Adjudication Order against Shri Ankit Vairana in the matter of Adani Exports ...Hindenburg Research
The Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) investigated trading in the shares of Adani Exports Ltd. (AEL) during two periods in 2004-2005. SEBI found that Ankit Vairana and others executed fraudulent trades that created artificial volume and distorted the market price of AEL shares. While Vairana was issued a show cause notice, he failed to respond or attend personal hearings. Based on evidence of reversal trades without beneficial ownership change, the adjudicating officer determined that Vairana violated securities market regulations. A penalty of 100,000 rupees was imposed on Vairana for his fraudulent trading.
The Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) investigated trading in the shares of Adani Exports Ltd. (AEL) during two periods in 2004-2005. SEBI found that Ankit Vairana and others executed fraudulent trades that created artificial volume and distorted the market price of AEL shares. While Vairana was issued a show cause notice, he failed to respond or attend personal hearings. Based on evidence of reversal trades without beneficial ownership change, the adjudicating officer determined that Vairana violated securities market regulations. A penalty of 100,000 Indian rupees was imposed on Vairana.
Adjudication Order against S.P. Jain Securities Pvt. Ltd. in the matter of Ad...Hindenburg Research
The document is an adjudication order from the Securities and Exchange Board of India regarding alleged violations by S. P. Jain Securities Pvt. Ltd. The order finds that:
1) S. P. Jain is alleged to have aided manipulation in the shares of Adani Exports Ltd. by executing synchronized trades for a client between 2004-2005.
2) However, the order finds there is insufficient evidence that S. P. Jain was aware of the nature of the trades or had colluded with any parties to engage in manipulation.
3) Given the lack of clear evidence, the order concludes the allegations that S. P. Jain violated securities market regulations and codes of conduct have not been
The document is an adjudication order from the Securities and Exchange Board of India imposing a monetary penalty on Ms. Rina Shah for fraudulent trading. The order finds that Ms. Shah executed trades of over 500,000 shares of Adani Exports Ltd. that involved synchronized buying and selling within 1 minute, without any change in beneficial ownership, in order to artificially inflate trading volume and manipulate the stock price. While Ms. Shah was given multiple opportunities to respond to the allegations, she failed to file any reply or attend hearings. Based on the evidence, the adjudicating officer determined Ms. Shah violated securities market regulations and imposed a penalty of 100,000 Indian rupees.
Adjudication Order against Ms. Rina Shah in the matter of Adani Exports Ltd.pdfHindenburg Research
The document is an adjudication order from the Securities and Exchange Board of India imposing a monetary penalty on Ms. Rina Shah for fraudulent trading. The order finds that Ms. Shah executed trades of shares in Adani Exports Ltd. that created artificial volume and did not result in real transfers of ownership, distorting the market. While Ms. Shah was given multiple opportunities to respond but did not, so the charges were considered admitted. Based on analysis of the trading patterns, the order concludes Ms. Shah violated market manipulation regulations and imposes a penalty of 100,000 Indian rupees.
Adjudication order against Ms Rajendra Jayantilal Shah in the matter of Adani...Hindenburg Research
This document is an adjudication order from the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) regarding alleged violations committed by Rajendra Jayantilal Shah, a sub-broker. SEBI investigated trading in the shares of Adani Exports Limited and alleged that through collusion, certain entities created artificial volumes and prices in the stock. It was alleged that Shah, trading for a client, engaged in synchronized and reversed trades that lacked real beneficial ownership changes and aimed to manipulate the stock price and volume. Shah claimed his client was a jobber and he had no reason to suspect wrongdoing. However, SEBI found Shah violated regulations against fraudulent trades and failed to properly oversee his client's suspicious pattern of trading. Shah was
This document is an adjudication order from the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) regarding alleged violations committed by Rajendra Jayantilal Shah, a sub-broker. SEBI investigated trading in the shares of Adani Exports Limited and alleged that through collusion, certain entities created artificial volumes and prices in the stock. It was alleged that Shah, trading for a client, engaged in synchronized and reversed trades that lacked real beneficial ownership changes and aimed to manipulate the stock price and volume. Shah claimed his client was a jobber and he had no reason to suspect wrongdoing. However, SEBI found Shah facilitated manipulation in violation of regulations based on trading patterns and failed to properly oversee his client's activities.
Adjudication order against Ms Rajendra Jayantilal Shah (1).pdfHindenburg Research
This document is an adjudication order from the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) regarding alleged violations committed by Rajendra Jayantilal Shah, a sub-broker. SEBI investigated trading in the shares of Adani Exports Limited and alleged that through collusion, certain entities created artificial volumes and prices in the stock. It was alleged that Shah, trading for a client, engaged in synchronized and reversed trades that lacked real beneficial ownership changes and aimed to manipulate the stock price and volume. Shah claimed his client was a jobber and he had no reason to suspect wrongdoing. However, SEBI found Shah violated regulations against fraudulent trades and failed to properly oversee his client's suspicious pattern of trading. Shah was
Adjudication order against Ms S.P.J. Stock Brokers Pvt. Ltd. in the matter of...Hindenburg Research
This document is an adjudication order from the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) against M/s. S.P.J. Stock Brokers Pvt. Limited regarding alleged violations of securities trading regulations. SEBI investigated trading in the shares of Adani Exports Limited and found that S.P.J. Stock Brokers executed large synchronized trades that appeared intended to artificially influence the share price and trading volume. SEBI alleges this violated prohibitions against market manipulation, fraudulent trades, and circular trading. After considering materials and a hearing, the adjudicating officer found S.P.J. Stock Brokers violated regulations against fraudulent and unfair trading practices and broker conduct rules, and would be subject to
This document is an adjudication order from the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) against M/s. S.P.J. Stock Brokers Pvt. Limited regarding alleged violations of securities trading regulations. SEBI investigated trading in the shares of Adani Exports Limited and found that S.P.J. Stock Brokers executed large synchronized trades that created artificial volumes and prices in the shares, without real changes in beneficial ownership. SEBI determined that these trades violated prohibitions against fraudulent and manipulative practices. As a result, SEBI found S.P.J. Stock Brokers liable for penalties under relevant sections of SEBI regulations.
This document is an adjudication order from the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) against M/s. S.P.J. Stock Brokers Pvt. Limited for alleged violations of securities trading regulations. SEBI investigated trading in the shares of Adani Exports Limited and found that S.P.J. Stock Brokers executed large synchronized trades that appeared aimed at artificially inflating prices and volumes. After considering trading data and a hearing with the brokerage, SEBI found S.P.J. Stock Brokers violated regulations against fraudulent and manipulative trading practices. As a result, SEBI determined penalties should be imposed on the brokerage under relevant sections of India's securities laws.
Adjudication order against Ms Ess Ess Intermediaries Pvt. Ltd..pdfHindenburg Research
This document is an adjudication order from the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) regarding alleged violations committed by M/s. Ess Ess Intermediaries Pvt. Limited. SEBI investigated trading in the shares of Adani Exports Limited and found evidence of artificial trading volumes and price manipulation. It was alleged that Ess Ess, as a sub-broker, aided and facilitated manipulation in the stock by executing large synchronized and reversed trades for a client on an intraday basis without real beneficial ownership changes. After considering the evidence and findings, the adjudicating officer concluded that Ess Ess violated SEBI regulations regarding fraudulent and unfair trading practices and its code of conduct as a sub-broker.
This document is an order from an Adjudicating Officer at the Securities and Exchange Board of India regarding alleged violations by M/s. Ess Ess Intermediaries Pvt. Limited. It is alleged that Ess Ess facilitated manipulation in the shares of Adani Exports Limited by executing suspicious trades for a client that inflated volumes and prices without real changes in ownership. The order examines evidence such as synchronized trades, self-trades, and reversals to determine if Ess Ess violated securities regulations regarding fraudulent or unfair trading practices and its duties as a sub-broker. Based on the evidence, the Adjudicating Officer finds that the allegations against Ess Ess regarding these violations are proven.
This SEC complaint alleges that Stephen Burns, former CEO of electric vehicle company Lordstown Motors, made negligent and materially inaccurate statements about pre-orders for Lordstown's pickup truck. Specifically, Lordstown claimed to have over 27,000 pre-orders from commercial fleets based on non-binding letters of intent, but the company had no effective processes for vetting customers or tracking pre-orders. The SEC alleges Burns' statements about pre-orders created an unrealistic depiction of demand in violation of securities laws.
The document is a letter from Nathan Anderson to the Board of Directors, Executives and Auditors of Tingo Group Inc. listing 38 questions regarding Tingo Group's business operations and financials. The questions raise serious doubts about the legitimacy of Tingo's reported revenues, customer and supplier relationships, licenses and permits. Key issues highlighted include a lack of evidence for Tingo's claimed cash balances, inventory, export volumes and mobile network operations.
More Related Content
Similar to Adjudication order against Shri Manoj T. Shah.pdf
Adjudication Order against Shri Sunil Kuril in the matter of Adani Exports Lt...Hindenburg Research
The document is an adjudication order from the Securities and Exchange Board of India imposing a monetary penalty on Sunil Kuril for fraudulent trading. The order found that Kuril executed a large number of reversal trades in Adani Exports Ltd shares, creating artificial volume and price manipulation without real change in ownership. This violated securities market regulations. Based on the evidence, the adjudicating officer imposed a penalty of 100,000 rupees on Kuril for the fraudulent trading.
Adjudication Order against Shri Santosh Gade in the matter of Adani Exports L...Hindenburg Research
The Securities and Exchange Board of India investigated trading in the shares of Adani Exports Ltd during two periods and found that Santosh Gade had engaged in fraudulent trades that created artificial volume and distorted the market price. Gade traded heavily through two brokers and engaged in synchronized and reversal trades without real change in ownership. As Gade did not respond to the show cause notice, the adjudicating officer concluded Gade violated market manipulation regulations and imposed a monetary penalty of 100,000 rupees.
The Securities and Exchange Board of India investigated trading in the shares of Adani Exports Ltd during two periods and found that Santosh Gade engaged in fraudulent trades that created artificial volume and distorted the market price. Gade executed large numbers of reversal trades without real change in ownership and also traded with himself through different brokers, indicating fictitious trades. As Gade did not respond to the show cause notice, he was found to have violated securities market regulations. An adjudicating officer imposed a monetary penalty of 100,000 rupees on Gade for his fraudulent trading practices.
Adjudication Order against Shri Sunil Purohit in the matter of Adani Exports ...Hindenburg Research
The document is an adjudication order from the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) against Sunil Purohit for alleged violations of securities trading regulations. SEBI investigated Purohit's trading in the shares of Adani Exports Ltd during two periods in 2004-2005 and found that his trades created artificial volume and prices without real change in ownership. Purohit did not respond to the show cause notice or request for a hearing. Based on evidence of reversal trades and circular trading, the adjudicating officer found Purohit guilty of fraudulent trades that violated securities market regulations.
The document is an adjudication order from the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) against Sunil Purohit for alleged violations of securities trading regulations. SEBI investigated Purohit's trading in the shares of Adani Exports Ltd during two periods in 2004-2005 and found that his trades created artificial volume and prices without real change in ownership. Purohit did not respond to the show cause notice or request for a hearing. Based on the evidence, the adjudicating officer found Purohit guilty of fraudulent trades that violated securities market regulations.
The document is an adjudication order from the Securities and Exchange Board of India imposing a monetary penalty on Haresh Posnak for fraudulent trading in shares of Adani Exports Ltd. The order finds that Posnak engaged in synchronized and reversal trades that created artificial volume and distorted the market price without any change in beneficial ownership. As Posnak did not respond to the allegations, the charges were deemed admitted. Considering the fraudulent nature of the trading and factors specified in the SEBI Act, a penalty of 100,000 rupees was imposed.
Adjudication Order against Shri Haresh Posnak in the matter of Adani Exports ...Hindenburg Research
The document is an adjudication order from the Securities and Exchange Board of India imposing a monetary penalty on Haresh Posnak for fraudulent trading in shares of Adani Exports Ltd. The order finds that Posnak engaged in synchronized and reversal trades that created artificial volume and distorted the market price without any change in beneficial ownership. As Posnak did not respond to the allegations, the charges were deemed admitted. Considering the fraudulent nature of the trading and factors specified in the SEBI Act, a penalty of 100,000 rupees was imposed.
Adjudication Order against Shri Ankit Vairana in the matter of Adani Exports ...Hindenburg Research
The Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) investigated trading in the shares of Adani Exports Ltd. (AEL) during two periods in 2004-2005. SEBI found that Ankit Vairana and others executed fraudulent trades that created artificial volume and distorted the market price of AEL shares. While Vairana was issued a show cause notice, he failed to respond or attend personal hearings. Based on evidence of reversal trades without beneficial ownership change, the adjudicating officer determined that Vairana violated securities market regulations. A penalty of 100,000 rupees was imposed on Vairana for his fraudulent trading.
The Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) investigated trading in the shares of Adani Exports Ltd. (AEL) during two periods in 2004-2005. SEBI found that Ankit Vairana and others executed fraudulent trades that created artificial volume and distorted the market price of AEL shares. While Vairana was issued a show cause notice, he failed to respond or attend personal hearings. Based on evidence of reversal trades without beneficial ownership change, the adjudicating officer determined that Vairana violated securities market regulations. A penalty of 100,000 Indian rupees was imposed on Vairana.
Adjudication Order against S.P. Jain Securities Pvt. Ltd. in the matter of Ad...Hindenburg Research
The document is an adjudication order from the Securities and Exchange Board of India regarding alleged violations by S. P. Jain Securities Pvt. Ltd. The order finds that:
1) S. P. Jain is alleged to have aided manipulation in the shares of Adani Exports Ltd. by executing synchronized trades for a client between 2004-2005.
2) However, the order finds there is insufficient evidence that S. P. Jain was aware of the nature of the trades or had colluded with any parties to engage in manipulation.
3) Given the lack of clear evidence, the order concludes the allegations that S. P. Jain violated securities market regulations and codes of conduct have not been
The document is an adjudication order from the Securities and Exchange Board of India imposing a monetary penalty on Ms. Rina Shah for fraudulent trading. The order finds that Ms. Shah executed trades of over 500,000 shares of Adani Exports Ltd. that involved synchronized buying and selling within 1 minute, without any change in beneficial ownership, in order to artificially inflate trading volume and manipulate the stock price. While Ms. Shah was given multiple opportunities to respond to the allegations, she failed to file any reply or attend hearings. Based on the evidence, the adjudicating officer determined Ms. Shah violated securities market regulations and imposed a penalty of 100,000 Indian rupees.
Adjudication Order against Ms. Rina Shah in the matter of Adani Exports Ltd.pdfHindenburg Research
The document is an adjudication order from the Securities and Exchange Board of India imposing a monetary penalty on Ms. Rina Shah for fraudulent trading. The order finds that Ms. Shah executed trades of shares in Adani Exports Ltd. that created artificial volume and did not result in real transfers of ownership, distorting the market. While Ms. Shah was given multiple opportunities to respond but did not, so the charges were considered admitted. Based on analysis of the trading patterns, the order concludes Ms. Shah violated market manipulation regulations and imposes a penalty of 100,000 Indian rupees.
Adjudication order against Ms Rajendra Jayantilal Shah in the matter of Adani...Hindenburg Research
This document is an adjudication order from the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) regarding alleged violations committed by Rajendra Jayantilal Shah, a sub-broker. SEBI investigated trading in the shares of Adani Exports Limited and alleged that through collusion, certain entities created artificial volumes and prices in the stock. It was alleged that Shah, trading for a client, engaged in synchronized and reversed trades that lacked real beneficial ownership changes and aimed to manipulate the stock price and volume. Shah claimed his client was a jobber and he had no reason to suspect wrongdoing. However, SEBI found Shah violated regulations against fraudulent trades and failed to properly oversee his client's suspicious pattern of trading. Shah was
This document is an adjudication order from the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) regarding alleged violations committed by Rajendra Jayantilal Shah, a sub-broker. SEBI investigated trading in the shares of Adani Exports Limited and alleged that through collusion, certain entities created artificial volumes and prices in the stock. It was alleged that Shah, trading for a client, engaged in synchronized and reversed trades that lacked real beneficial ownership changes and aimed to manipulate the stock price and volume. Shah claimed his client was a jobber and he had no reason to suspect wrongdoing. However, SEBI found Shah facilitated manipulation in violation of regulations based on trading patterns and failed to properly oversee his client's activities.
Adjudication order against Ms Rajendra Jayantilal Shah (1).pdfHindenburg Research
This document is an adjudication order from the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) regarding alleged violations committed by Rajendra Jayantilal Shah, a sub-broker. SEBI investigated trading in the shares of Adani Exports Limited and alleged that through collusion, certain entities created artificial volumes and prices in the stock. It was alleged that Shah, trading for a client, engaged in synchronized and reversed trades that lacked real beneficial ownership changes and aimed to manipulate the stock price and volume. Shah claimed his client was a jobber and he had no reason to suspect wrongdoing. However, SEBI found Shah violated regulations against fraudulent trades and failed to properly oversee his client's suspicious pattern of trading. Shah was
Adjudication order against Ms S.P.J. Stock Brokers Pvt. Ltd. in the matter of...Hindenburg Research
This document is an adjudication order from the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) against M/s. S.P.J. Stock Brokers Pvt. Limited regarding alleged violations of securities trading regulations. SEBI investigated trading in the shares of Adani Exports Limited and found that S.P.J. Stock Brokers executed large synchronized trades that appeared intended to artificially influence the share price and trading volume. SEBI alleges this violated prohibitions against market manipulation, fraudulent trades, and circular trading. After considering materials and a hearing, the adjudicating officer found S.P.J. Stock Brokers violated regulations against fraudulent and unfair trading practices and broker conduct rules, and would be subject to
This document is an adjudication order from the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) against M/s. S.P.J. Stock Brokers Pvt. Limited regarding alleged violations of securities trading regulations. SEBI investigated trading in the shares of Adani Exports Limited and found that S.P.J. Stock Brokers executed large synchronized trades that created artificial volumes and prices in the shares, without real changes in beneficial ownership. SEBI determined that these trades violated prohibitions against fraudulent and manipulative practices. As a result, SEBI found S.P.J. Stock Brokers liable for penalties under relevant sections of SEBI regulations.
This document is an adjudication order from the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) against M/s. S.P.J. Stock Brokers Pvt. Limited for alleged violations of securities trading regulations. SEBI investigated trading in the shares of Adani Exports Limited and found that S.P.J. Stock Brokers executed large synchronized trades that appeared aimed at artificially inflating prices and volumes. After considering trading data and a hearing with the brokerage, SEBI found S.P.J. Stock Brokers violated regulations against fraudulent and manipulative trading practices. As a result, SEBI determined penalties should be imposed on the brokerage under relevant sections of India's securities laws.
Adjudication order against Ms Ess Ess Intermediaries Pvt. Ltd..pdfHindenburg Research
This document is an adjudication order from the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) regarding alleged violations committed by M/s. Ess Ess Intermediaries Pvt. Limited. SEBI investigated trading in the shares of Adani Exports Limited and found evidence of artificial trading volumes and price manipulation. It was alleged that Ess Ess, as a sub-broker, aided and facilitated manipulation in the stock by executing large synchronized and reversed trades for a client on an intraday basis without real beneficial ownership changes. After considering the evidence and findings, the adjudicating officer concluded that Ess Ess violated SEBI regulations regarding fraudulent and unfair trading practices and its code of conduct as a sub-broker.
This document is an order from an Adjudicating Officer at the Securities and Exchange Board of India regarding alleged violations by M/s. Ess Ess Intermediaries Pvt. Limited. It is alleged that Ess Ess facilitated manipulation in the shares of Adani Exports Limited by executing suspicious trades for a client that inflated volumes and prices without real changes in ownership. The order examines evidence such as synchronized trades, self-trades, and reversals to determine if Ess Ess violated securities regulations regarding fraudulent or unfair trading practices and its duties as a sub-broker. Based on the evidence, the Adjudicating Officer finds that the allegations against Ess Ess regarding these violations are proven.
Similar to Adjudication order against Shri Manoj T. Shah.pdf (20)
This SEC complaint alleges that Stephen Burns, former CEO of electric vehicle company Lordstown Motors, made negligent and materially inaccurate statements about pre-orders for Lordstown's pickup truck. Specifically, Lordstown claimed to have over 27,000 pre-orders from commercial fleets based on non-binding letters of intent, but the company had no effective processes for vetting customers or tracking pre-orders. The SEC alleges Burns' statements about pre-orders created an unrealistic depiction of demand in violation of securities laws.
The document is a letter from Nathan Anderson to the Board of Directors, Executives and Auditors of Tingo Group Inc. listing 38 questions regarding Tingo Group's business operations and financials. The questions raise serious doubts about the legitimacy of Tingo's reported revenues, customer and supplier relationships, licenses and permits. Key issues highlighted include a lack of evidence for Tingo's claimed cash balances, inventory, export volumes and mobile network operations.
1) Osirius Group LLC filed a complaint against Ideanomics Inc. in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan. Osirius provided engineering services to Via Motors from July 2022 to December 2022, invoicing Via Motors monthly. Via Motors failed to pay the invoices, owing Osirius over $2 million.
2) Ideanomics acquired Via Motors in January 2023 and had previously agreed to pay any remaining debt owed by Via Motors to Osirius. However, Ideanomics failed to pay the outstanding amount owed for Osirius' services.
3) Osirius is suing Ideanomics for breach of contract and
This 6-page legal document outlines the charges in a criminal case. It describes the defendant and their alleged crimes, which include wire fraud and aggravated identity theft. Further details are provided about the scheme, the victims impacted, and evidence collected. If convicted on all counts, the defendant faces a maximum penalty of 32 years in prison and $1 million in fines.
1) Acuitas Capital invested $20 million in Ideanomics in exchange for preferred stock and warrants that were convertible into Ideanomics common stock. However, Ideanomics has now refused to honor Acuitas Capital's requests to convert these securities, in breach of their agreement.
2) Ideanomics claims the investment agreement is "null and void" due to unrelated allegations against the CEO of Acuitas Capital, but these allegations do not excuse Ideanomics' contractual obligations.
3) Prompt relief is needed because Ideanomics has admitted it may not be able to continue as a going concern. Unless ordered to honor the conversion requests, the value of Acuitas Capital's remaining
This document outlines the terms and conditions of a private offering of $750 million in senior secured notes issued by Adani Green Energy Limited. The notes will pay 4.375% annual interest and mature in 2024. The notes are being offered only to qualified institutional buyers in the US and offshore purchasers in reliance on exemptions from securities registration laws. The notes will be listed on the Singapore Exchange and India INX and secured by certain assets of the issuer described in security documents. The proceeds are subject to restrictions on use and transfer.
This document is an annual return form for a private company limited by shares called Milestone Tradelinks Private Limited. It provides details about the company's registration, activities, shareholding, directors and key managerial personnel, meetings, and attendance of directors. Some key details include the company's registered office in Ahmedabad, its main business activity of wholesale trading, total paid up capital of Rs. 407,000, and that directors Rajesh Rameshchandra Vora and Manish Amrutlal Shah each hold 0 shares as of the financial year end.
The auditor's report provides an unmodified opinion on the financial statements of Pmc Projects (India) Private Limited for the period 01/04/2013 to 31/03/2014. The auditor found that the company has maintained proper records of fixed assets, inventories and loans. Internal control procedures for purchase, sale and fixed assets were adequate. The company has not accepted any deposits from the public. Statutory dues have generally been regularly paid, with no material disputed amounts. No frauds were reported during the period.
Chang Chien-Ting holds significant beneficial ownership in PMC Projects (India) Pvt. Ltd. through PMC Infra Limited, a company registered in Mauritius. Chang holds 100% of PMC Infra Limited and exercises his significant beneficial interest in PMC Projects (India) Pvt. Ltd. by virtue of shares held in PMC Infra Limited. He declares this significant beneficial ownership in PMC Projects (India) Pvt. Ltd. as required by Section 90(1) of the Companies Act of India. The declaration provides details of Chang such as his address, date of birth, occupation, and nationality. It specifies the nature of his indirect holding in PMC Projects (India) Pvt.
Adani Developers (later renamed Sunbourne) 2013 Annual Report.pdfHindenburg Research
The document is an auditor's report for Adani Developers Private Limited for the period of April 1, 2011 to March 31, 2012. The auditor gave an unqualified opinion and did not note any qualifications, reservations or adverse remarks. Specifically, the auditor stated that the company maintained proper records of fixed assets, conducted physical verification of inventories, and complied with statutory dues payments. The auditor also confirmed the company had an adequate internal control and internal audit system.
This document contains a list of orders from the Securities Appellate Tribunal (SAT) and adjudication orders from the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) related to various Adani group companies, primarily Adani Exports Limited. The orders range from 2008 to 2019 and include matters related to stock market manipulation and insider trading involving several individuals and brokerage firms.
Vinod Adani - The Man Behind The Adani Group’s Offshore Deals (Morning Contex...Hindenburg Research
Vinod Adani is the elder brother of Gautam Adani, Asia's second richest man. Vinod oversees many of the Adani group's offshore deals and structures through companies based in tax havens like Mauritius and Cyprus. He has been involved in major deals like the Ambuja Cements acquisition and Total's investment in Adani Green Energy. However, the Adani group has previously denied Vinod's involvement. Vinod uses complex offshore structures that allow deals to be carried out without following all Indian laws, potentially reducing taxes. There are also ongoing legal issues regarding accusations of money laundering through Vinod's offshore companies that supplied equipment to Adani Power projects in India.
Krunal Trade & Investment Pvt Ltd is a private limited company incorporated in Mauritius on October 4, 2005 as a global business company. The company's registered office is located at Trustlink House in Floreal, Mauritius. The current directors are Adani Vinod Shantilal, Caillou Louis Ricardo, Mittra Subir, and Ramsagur Shailend. Trustlink International Limited serves as the company secretary.
Gardenia Trade and Investment Ltd is a private limited company incorporated on February 2nd, 2021. It operates as a global business company with its registered office in Mauritius. The company has three directors: Agowun Nihad Mohammad Akram, Mittra Subir, and Toorabally Shakill Ahmad. Amicorp (Mauritius) Limited serves as the company's management and secretarial services provider.
Birch Trade and Investment Ltd is a private limited company incorporated in Mauritius on October 19, 2021 as a global business company. The company has three directors: Agowun Nihad Mohammad Akram, Mittra Subir, and Toorabally Shakill Ahmad. Amicorp (Mauritius) Limited serves as the company's management company and secretary.
Athena Trade and Investments Pvt Ltd is a private limited company incorporated in Mauritius on July 18, 2017 for global business. The company has three directors: Mittra Subir from Dubai, Seewooruttun Indranathsingh from Mauritius, and Toorabally Shakill Ahmad from Mauritius. Amicorp (Mauritius) Limited serves as the company's management and secretarial services provider.
Flourishing Trade and Investment Ltd is a private limited global business company incorporated on August 18, 2017 in Mauritius. The company has three directors - Mittra Subir, Seewooruttun Indranathsingh, and Toorabally Shakill Ahmad. Amicorp (Mauritius) Limited serves as the company's management and secretary.
Delphinium Trade and Investment Ltd is a private limited company incorporated on February 2nd, 2021 in Mauritius for global business purposes. The company has three directors: Mittra Subir, Seewooruttun Indranathsingh, and Toorabally Shakill Ahmad. Amicorp (Mauritius) Limited serves as the company's management company and secretary.
Dome Trade and Investment Ltd is a private limited company incorporated in Mauritius on August 18, 2017 as a global business company. It has 4 directors: Adani Vinod Shantilal, Agowun Nihad Mohammad Akram, Mittra Subir, and Toorabally Shakill Ahmad. Amicorp (Mauritius) Limited serves as the company's management company and secretary, located at Level 6, Tower 1, NeXteracom Building in Ebene, Mauritius.
Endeavour Trade and Investment Ltd was incorporated on April 29, 2021 as a private limited company in Mauritius for global business. The company has 3 directors - Mittra Subir, Seewooruttun Indranathsingh, and Toorabally Shakill Ahmad. Amicorp (Mauritius) Limited serves as the management company and secretary since the company's incorporation.
Industrial Tech SW: Category Renewal and CreationChristian Dahlen
Every industrial revolution has created a new set of categories and a new set of players.
Multiple new technologies have emerged, but Samsara and C3.ai are only two companies which have gone public so far.
Manufacturing startups constitute the largest pipeline share of unicorns and IPO candidates in the SF Bay Area, and software startups dominate in Germany.
𝐔𝐧𝐯𝐞𝐢𝐥 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐅𝐮𝐭𝐮𝐫𝐞 𝐨𝐟 𝐄𝐧𝐞𝐫𝐠𝐲 𝐄𝐟𝐟𝐢𝐜𝐢𝐞𝐧𝐜𝐲 𝐰𝐢𝐭𝐡 𝐍𝐄𝐖𝐍𝐓𝐈𝐃𝐄’𝐬 𝐋𝐚𝐭𝐞𝐬𝐭 𝐎𝐟𝐟𝐞𝐫𝐢𝐧𝐠𝐬
Explore the details in our newly released product manual, which showcases NEWNTIDE's advanced heat pump technologies. Delve into our energy-efficient and eco-friendly solutions tailored for diverse global markets.
Garments ERP Software in Bangladesh _ Pridesys IT Ltd.pdfPridesys IT Ltd.
Pridesys Garments ERP is one of the leading ERP solution provider, especially for Garments industries which is integrated with
different modules that cover all the aspects of your Garments Business. This solution supports multi-currency and multi-location
based operations. It aims at keeping track of all the activities including receiving an order from buyer, costing of order, resource
planning, procurement of raw materials, production management, inventory management, import-export process, order
reconciliation process etc. It’s also integrated with other modules of Pridesys ERP including finance, accounts, HR, supply-chain etc.
With this automated solution you can easily track your business activities and entire operations of your garments manufacturing
proces
[To download this presentation, visit:
https://www.oeconsulting.com.sg/training-presentations]
This presentation is a curated compilation of PowerPoint diagrams and templates designed to illustrate 20 different digital transformation frameworks and models. These frameworks are based on recent industry trends and best practices, ensuring that the content remains relevant and up-to-date.
Key highlights include Microsoft's Digital Transformation Framework, which focuses on driving innovation and efficiency, and McKinsey's Ten Guiding Principles, which provide strategic insights for successful digital transformation. Additionally, Forrester's framework emphasizes enhancing customer experiences and modernizing IT infrastructure, while IDC's MaturityScape helps assess and develop organizational digital maturity. MIT's framework explores cutting-edge strategies for achieving digital success.
These materials are perfect for enhancing your business or classroom presentations, offering visual aids to supplement your insights. Please note that while comprehensive, these slides are intended as supplementary resources and may not be complete for standalone instructional purposes.
Frameworks/Models included:
Microsoft’s Digital Transformation Framework
McKinsey’s Ten Guiding Principles of Digital Transformation
Forrester’s Digital Transformation Framework
IDC’s Digital Transformation MaturityScape
MIT’s Digital Transformation Framework
Gartner’s Digital Transformation Framework
Accenture’s Digital Strategy & Enterprise Frameworks
Deloitte’s Digital Industrial Transformation Framework
Capgemini’s Digital Transformation Framework
PwC’s Digital Transformation Framework
Cisco’s Digital Transformation Framework
Cognizant’s Digital Transformation Framework
DXC Technology’s Digital Transformation Framework
The BCG Strategy Palette
McKinsey’s Digital Transformation Framework
Digital Transformation Compass
Four Levels of Digital Maturity
Design Thinking Framework
Business Model Canvas
Customer Journey Map
Digital Marketing with a Focus on Sustainabilitysssourabhsharma
Digital Marketing best practices including influencer marketing, content creators, and omnichannel marketing for Sustainable Brands at the Sustainable Cosmetics Summit 2024 in New York
Best Competitive Marble Pricing in Dubai - ☎ 9928909666Stone Art Hub
Stone Art Hub offers the best competitive Marble Pricing in Dubai, ensuring affordability without compromising quality. With a wide range of exquisite marble options to choose from, you can enhance your spaces with elegance and sophistication. For inquiries or orders, contact us at ☎ 9928909666. Experience luxury at unbeatable prices.
Dive into this presentation and learn about the ways in which you can buy an engagement ring. This guide will help you choose the perfect engagement rings for women.
The Steadfast and Reliable Bull: Taurus Zodiac Signmy Pandit
Explore the steadfast and reliable nature of the Taurus Zodiac Sign. Discover the personality traits, key dates, and horoscope insights that define the determined and practical Taurus, and learn how their grounded nature makes them the anchor of the zodiac.
How are Lilac French Bulldogs Beauty Charming the World and Capturing Hearts....Lacey Max
“After being the most listed dog breed in the United States for 31
years in a row, the Labrador Retriever has dropped to second place
in the American Kennel Club's annual survey of the country's most
popular canines. The French Bulldog is the new top dog in the
United States as of 2022. The stylish puppy has ascended the
rankings in rapid time despite having health concerns and limited
color choices.”
❼❷⓿❺❻❷❽❷❼❽ Dpboss Matka Result Satta Matka Guessing Satta Fix jodi Kalyan Final ank Satta Matka Dpbos Final ank Satta Matta Matka 143 Kalyan Matka Guessing Final Matka Final ank Today Matka 420 Satta Batta Satta 143 Kalyan Chart Main Bazar Chart vip Matka Guessing Dpboss 143 Guessing Kalyan night
Unveiling the Dynamic Personalities, Key Dates, and Horoscope Insights: Gemin...my Pandit
Explore the fascinating world of the Gemini Zodiac Sign. Discover the unique personality traits, key dates, and horoscope insights of Gemini individuals. Learn how their sociable, communicative nature and boundless curiosity make them the dynamic explorers of the zodiac. Dive into the duality of the Gemini sign and understand their intellectual and adventurous spirit.
The Genesis of BriansClub.cm Famous Dark WEb PlatformSabaaSudozai
BriansClub.cm, a famous platform on the dark web, has become one of the most infamous carding marketplaces, specializing in the sale of stolen credit card data.
Part 2 Deep Dive: Navigating the 2024 Slowdownjeffkluth1
Introduction
The global retail industry has weathered numerous storms, with the financial crisis of 2008 serving as a poignant reminder of the sector's resilience and adaptability. However, as we navigate the complex landscape of 2024, retailers face a unique set of challenges that demand innovative strategies and a fundamental shift in mindset. This white paper contrasts the impact of the 2008 recession on the retail sector with the current headwinds retailers are grappling with, while offering a comprehensive roadmap for success in this new paradigm.
Navigating the world of forex trading can be challenging, especially for beginners. To help you make an informed decision, we have comprehensively compared the best forex brokers in India for 2024. This article, reviewed by Top Forex Brokers Review, will cover featured award winners, the best forex brokers, featured offers, the best copy trading platforms, the best forex brokers for beginners, the best MetaTrader brokers, and recently updated reviews. We will focus on FP Markets, Black Bull, EightCap, IC Markets, and Octa.
Storytelling is an incredibly valuable tool to share data and information. To get the most impact from stories there are a number of key ingredients. These are based on science and human nature. Using these elements in a story you can deliver information impactfully, ensure action and drive change.
4 Benefits of Partnering with an OnlyFans Agency for Content Creators.pdfonlyfansmanagedau
In the competitive world of content creation, standing out and maximising revenue on platforms like OnlyFans can be challenging. This is where partnering with an OnlyFans agency can make a significant difference. Here are five key benefits for content creators considering this option:
Best practices for project execution and deliveryCLIVE MINCHIN
A select set of project management best practices to keep your project on-track, on-cost and aligned to scope. Many firms have don't have the necessary skills, diligence, methods and oversight of their projects; this leads to slippage, higher costs and longer timeframes. Often firms have a history of projects that simply failed to move the needle. These best practices will help your firm avoid these pitfalls but they require fortitude to apply.
The APCO Geopolitical Radar - Q3 2024 The Global Operating Environment for Bu...APCO
The Radar reflects input from APCO’s teams located around the world. It distils a host of interconnected events and trends into insights to inform operational and strategic decisions. Issues covered in this edition include:
The APCO Geopolitical Radar - Q3 2024 The Global Operating Environment for Bu...
Adjudication order against Shri Manoj T. Shah.pdf
1. Page 1 of 8
BEFORE THE ADJUDICATING OFFICER
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA
[ADJUDICATION ORDER NO. SD/AO/78/2011]
________________________________________________________________
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 BY ADJUDICATING OFFICER)
RULES, 1995
Against
Shri Manoj T. Shah
[PAN: BIYPS8509M]
In the matter of
Adani Exports Ltd.
Background
1. Securities and Exchange Board of India (hereinafter referred to as ‘SEBI’)
conducted investigation in respect of buying, selling and dealing in the
shares of M/s. Adani Exports Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as ‘AEL ’) for the
period from between July 09, 2004 and January 14, 2005 (hereinafter
referred to as the ‘First Period’) and August 01, 2005 to September 05,
2005 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Second Period’). The scrip of AEL
was traded on the exchanges with a face value of Rs.10 per share up to
July 27, 2004 and thereafter with a face value of Rs.1. The price of the
scrip of AEL witnessed wide fluctuations in the price ranging from Rs.481
to Rs.756 during the First Period and from Rs.64.35 to Rs.74.20 during
the Second Period.
2. Page 2 of 8
2. The role of the main brokers and clients who had traded heavily during the
period under investigation in the scrip of AEL was scrutinized. The
Investigations revealed that certain entities, including Shri Manoj T. Shah
(hereinafter referred to as the ‘Noticee’), transacted in the shares of AEL
in a fraudulent manner that led to creation of artificial volume and a false
market.
3. SEBI has therefore, initiated adjudication proceedings under the Securities
and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992 (hereinafter referred to as the
‘Act’) against the Noticee to inquire into and adjudge the alleged violations
of the provisions of Regulations 4 (1), 4 (2) (a), (b), (e) and (g) of the SEBI
(Prohibition of Fraudulent and Unfair Trade Practices Relating to
Securities Market) Regulations, 2003 (hereinafter referred to as the
‘PFUTP Regulations’).
Appointment of Adjudicating Officer:
4. SEBI vide Order dated July 24, 2007 appointed Ms. Babita Rayudu as the
Adjudicating Officer (AO) under section 15-I of the Act read with Rule 3 of
SEBI (Procedure for holding Inquiry and Imposing Penalties by
Adjudicating Officer) Rules, 1995 (hereinafter referred to as the
‘Adjudication Rules’) to inquire into and adjudge under Section 15HA of
the Act, the alleged violation of the above mentioned provisions of PFUTP
Regulations by the Noticee. Thereafter, consequent to Ms. Rayudu
proceeding on deputation to IRDA, SEBI vide Order dated November 23,
2007 appointed the undersigned as the AO in the instant matter.
Notice, Reply & Personal Hearing
5. The undersigned issued a Notice bearing no. EAD-2 /SD/AB/129569/2008
dated June 23, 2008 (hereinafter referred to as ‘SCN’) to the Noticee in
terms of Rule 4 of the Adjudication Rules requiring him to show cause as
to why an inquiry should not be held against him for the alleged violations.
3. Page 3 of 8
6. The SCN was sent by Registered Post Acknowledgment Due and the
same was duly delivered. In response to the same, the Noticee sent a
letter dated July 15, 2008. In the interest of natural justice and in order to
conduct an inquiry as per Rule 4 (3) of the Adjudication Rules, the
undersigned granted opportunities of personal hearing to the Noticee on
February 02, 2009 and February 18, 2009. The Noticee did not appear for
the said personal hearings. Thereafter, vide Office Note dated March 23,
2009 the undersigned was requested to keep the adjudication
proceedings in abeyance as the Noticee had filed a consent application in
this matter. Vide Office Note dated September 22, 2009 it was
communicated to the undersigned that the said consent application was
rejected in the HPAC meeting held on August 31, 2009 and the
undersigned was requested to revive the adjudication proceedings.
Thereafter, the undersigned granted another opportunity of personal
hearing to the Noticee which was attended by him on February 24, 2010.
During the personal hearing, the Noticee submitted that he had received
the SCN and had understood the allegations against him. On being asked
whether he wished to seek or inspect any further documents in this matter,
the Noticee submitted that he had seen all the documents and did not
wish to seek any further documents. He also undertook to submit a
detailed written reply to the SCN by March 26, 2010. Thereafter, the
Noticee submitted a reply vide letter dated March 26, 2010.
7. In view of the above, I am proceeding with the inquiry taking into account
all the documents and material as available on record.
Consideration of Issues, Evidence and Findings
8. I have carefully perused the charges made against the Noticee mentioned
in the SCN, the written and oral submissions of the Noticee and the
4. Page 4 of 8
materials and documents available on record. The issues that arise for
consideration in the present case are:
a) Whether the Noticee has violated the provisions of
Regulations 4 (1), 4 (2) (a), (b), (e) & (g) of PFUTP Regulations?
b) Does the violation, if any, on the part of the Noticee attract any
monetary penalty under Section 15HA of the Act?
c) If yes, what should be the quantum of monetary penalty?
9. Before moving forward, it will be appropriate to refer to the relevant
provisions of PFUTP Regulations which read as under:-
4. Prohibition of manipulative, fraudulent and unfair trade practices
(1) Without prejudice to the provisions of regulation 3, no person shall
indulge in a fraudulent or an unfair trade practice in securities.
(2) Dealing in securities shall be deemed to be a fraudulent or an unfair
trade practice if it involves fraud and may include all or any of the following,
namely :—
(a) indulging in an act which creates false or misleading appearance of
trading in the securities market;
(b) dealing in a security not intended to effect transfer of beneficial ownership
but intended to operate only as a device to inflate, depress or cause
fluctuations in the price of such security for wrongful gain or avoidance of
loss;
(e) any act or omission amounting to manipulation of the price of a security;
(g) entering into a transaction in securities without intention of performing it
or without intention of change of ownership of such security;
10. It is alleged in the SCN that the Noticee had traded substantially in the
scrip of AEL during the First Period through M/s Rajesh N. Jhaveri who is
5. Page 5 of 8
a sub broker of M/s ASE Capital Market and had allegedly entered into
synchronized trading with clients dealing through the same member, on
BSE. The Noticee had allegedly entered into synchronized trading
throughout the period from 09.07.2004 to 27.07.2004. He along with a few
other entities had traded substantially in the scrip of AEL and have created
a volume of 2,98,566 shares during the above period which is around
28.87% of total traded volumes. Orders for these trades were
synchronized as the buy and sell orders were placed within time gap of
one minute. In case of 1259 trades for 2,52,606 shares the buy and sell
order quantity and rate were identical and placed within 0-10 seconds of
each other. The Noticee’s trades for buying 58,010 shares and selling
57,860 shares were allegedly synchronized. Thus, the Noticee is alleged
to have executed fraudulent trades by creating false and misleading
appearance of trading and price manipulation in the scrip of AEL.
11. The Noticee vide letter dated March 26, 2010 has submitted inter alia that
he had done jobbing in the scrip in the ordinary manner of his trading and
there was no intention on his part as stated in the SCN but same may be
on account of shift from jobbing in the ‘A’ group scrip to ‘B’ group in the
case of Adani. He was doing jobbing in Adani for more than 5 years. He
further submitted that his financial condition is in very bad shape and even
as on date he did not have sufficient income to meet his livelihoods and to
take care of his parents. The Noticee denied the allegations contained in
the SCN.
12. The Hon’ble SAT in the matter of Ketan Parekh v. Securities and
Exchange Board of India (Appeal no. 2 of 2004, Date of Decision-
14.07.2006), has held that
“…Any transaction executed with the intention to defeat the market
mechanism whether negotiated or not would be illegal. Whether a
transaction has been executed with the intention to manipulate the market
6. Page 6 of 8
or defeat its mechanism will depend upon the intention of the parties
which could be inferred from the attending circumstances because direct
evidence in such cases may not be available. The nature of the
transaction executed, the frequency with which such transactions
are undertaken, the value of the transactions, whether they involve
circular trading and whether there is real change of beneficial
ownership, the conditions then prevailing in the market are some of
the factors which go to show the intention of the parties. This list of
factors, in the very nature of things, cannot be exhaustive. Any one factor
may or may not be decisive and it is from the cumulative effect of these
that an inference will have to be drawn.” (emphasis supplied)
13. As per the findings of the Investigation Report, the Noticee’s contribution
to synchronized trades was purchase of 1,23,055 and sale of 1,12,651
shares. After careful examination of materials available with me, I find
from the trade and order log available on record that the Noticee (client
code 052M001) had traded on many days during July 09, 2004 to July 23,
2004. He had executed a large number of trades which were reversal in
nature. I find that the Noticee was executing buy/sell trades and reversing
them on the same day or the next day with the same counterparty. He had
the same counterparty client (Client Code - 087V001) for all his trades on
all the days and the said counterparty client was trading through the same
broker. Further, I find that the time difference between the buy and sell
order for each of his trades was in the range of 0 to 10 seconds only.
From the same, it is amply clear that the Noticee had executed fictitious
trades which merely created artificial volume and did not result in transfer
of beneficial ownership. Taking into consideration the test laid down in the
abovementioned SAT Order, I conclude that the trades of the Noticee
were fictitious which created false and misleading appearance of trading
and price manipulation in the scrip of AEL. I do not find the submissions
made by the Noticee in his defense to be satisfactory.
7. Page 7 of 8
14. The abovementioned observations and findings establish beyond doubt
that the Noticee had executed fraudulent trades in the scrip of AEL which
did not result in transfer of beneficial ownership and had created false and
misleading appearance of trading and price manipulation in the scrip. In
view of the aforesaid observations and findings, I conclude that the
Noticee has violated Regulations 4 (1), 4 (2) (a), (b), (e) & (g) of the
PFUTP Regulations which makes the Noticee liable for monetary penalty
under Section 15HA of the Act.
15. The provisions of Section 15HA of the Act as prevailing at the relevant
time are reproduced hereunder :
Penalty for fraudulent and unfair trade practices.
15HA. If any person indulges in fraudulent and unfair trade practices relating
to securities, he shall be liable to a penalty of twenty-five crore rupees or
three times the amount of profits made out of such practices, whichever is
higher.
16. While imposing monetary penalty it is obligatory to consider the factors
stipulated in Section 15J of the Act which reads as under:
15J - Factors to be taken into account by the adjudicating officer
While adjudging quantum of penalty under section 15-I, the adjudicating
officer shall have due regard to the following factors, namely:-
(a) the amount of disproportionate gain or unfair advantage, wherever
quantifiable, made as a result of the default;
(b) the amount of loss caused to an investor or group of investors as a result
of the default;
(c) the repetitive nature of the default.
8. Page 8 of 8
17. I observe that from the material available on record it is difficult to quantify
any gain or unfair advantage accrued to the Noticee as a result of the
default. From the records, the extent of loss suffered by the investors as a
result of the default of the Noticee is also not computable.
Order
18. In view of the above, after considering all the facts and circumstances of
the case and exercising the powers conferred upon me under Section 15-I
(2) of the Act read with Rule 5 of the Adjudication Rules, I hereby impose
a monetary penalty of ` 2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs Only) under
Section 15HA of the Act on the Noticee. In my view, the penalty is
commensurate with the default committed by the Noticee.
19. The above penalty amount shall be paid by the Noticee through a duly
crossed demand draft drawn in favour of “SEBI – Penalties Remittable to
Government of India” and payable at Mumbai, within 45 days of receipt of
this order. The said demand draft should be forwarded to the Division
Chief, Investigation Department (ID-1), Securities and Exchange Board of
India, Plot No. C4-A, ‘G’ Block, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (E),
Mumbai – 400 051.
20. In terms of the Rule 6 of the Adjudication Rules, copies of this order are
sent to the Noticee and also to Securities and Exchange Board of India.
Date: April 01, 2011 SANDEEP DEORE
Place: Mumbai ADJUDICATING OFFICER