BEFORE THE
SECURITIES APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
MUMBAI
Date of Decision : 10.04.2019
Misc. Application No. 257 of 2018
And
Appeal No. 309 of 2018
P M Commercial Co. Ltd.
2, Lal Bazar Street,
Todi Chambers, 5th Floor,
Kolkata – 700 001.
…Appellant
Versus
Adjudicating Officer,
Securities and Exchange Board of India.
SEBI Bhavan, Plot No. C-4A, G-Block,
Bandra-Kurla Complex, Bandra (East),
Mumbai – 400 051.
…Respondent
Mr. Vinay Chauhan, Advocate i/b Corporate Law Chambers
India for the Appellant.
Mr. Sumit Rai, Advocate with Mr. Kaushal Parsekar, Advocate
i/b Legasis Partners for the Respondent.
CORAM : Justice Tarun Agarwala, Presiding Officer
Dr. C.K.G. Nair, Member
Justice M.T. Joshi, Judicial Member
Per : Justice Tarun Agarwala (Oral)
2
Misc. Application No. 257 of 2018:-
1.
There is a delay of 82 days in filing the appeal. Cause
shown is sufficient. The delay in filing the appeal is condoned.
Application is allowed.
Appeal No. 309 of 2018:-
2.
A penalty of ` 5 lakh was imposed under Section 15HB of
the SEBI Act, 1992 for not obtaining SCORES authentication
within the stipulated period as per the SEBI circulars. The
appellant being aggrieved has filed the present appeal.
3.
Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, we find
that the web based investor grievance redressal portal known as
SCORES was started by SEBI in the year 2011 and all the
companies were required to obtain user ID and login password
so that investor grievances could be settled ‘on-line’. In this
regard SEBI issued a circular dated August 13, 2012 fixing a
time line for obtaining SCORES authentication. Since the
appellant failed to obtain SCORES authentication the penalty of
Rs. 5 lakh was imposed.
3
4.
The learned counsel for the appellant contended that there
was no deliberate intention on the part of the appellant in not
obtaining SCORES authentication and the lapse occurred
inadvertently. It was contended that since 1997 there has been
no trading in the scrip of the appellant company as the same was
suspended by the Calcutta Stock Exchange due to noncompliance of the grievances of listing agreement. It was also
contended that in similar circumstances SEBI has imposed a
minimum penalty of Rupees One Lakh for non-compliance of
SCORES authentication to other entities whereas in the instant
case the appellant has been discriminated and a penalty of Rs. 5
lakh has been imposed.
5.
Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, we find
that during pendency of the appeal the appellant has obtained
the SCORES authentication. Further we find that, since the
default was not intentional and considering the factors
enumerated in Section 15J, we are of the opinion that the
appellant did not get any unfair advantage nor any loss was
caused to the investors. In this backdrop, the imposition of
penalty of Rs. 5 lakh appears to be harsh and excessive.
4
6.
For the reasons stated aforesaid, the appeal is partly
allowed. The penalty is reduced from ` 5,00,000/- (Rupees Five
Lakh Only) to ` 2,50,000/- (Rupees Two Lakh Fifty Thousand
Only) which will be paid within four weeks from today.
Sd/Justice Tarun Agarwala
Presiding Officer
Sd/Dr. C.K.G. Nair
Member
Sd/Justice M.T. Joshi
Judicial Member
10.04.2019
Prepared and compared by:msb