A C Commodities vs Sebi

BEFORE THE SECURITIES APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI Date of Decision : 12.10.2022 Misc. Application No. 1065 of 2022 And Appeal No. 647 of 2022 A C Commodities (Through its Partner Mr. Vipul Arunkumar Trivedi) 12, Shanti Sadan Estate, Opp. Dinbai Tower, Mirzapur, Ahmedabad - 380 001. .....Appellant Versus Securities and Exchange Board of India SEBI Bhavan, Plot No. C-4A, G-Block, Bandra-Kurla Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai - 400 051. ... Respondent Mr. Vikas Bengani, Advocate for the Appellant. Mr. Gaurav Joshi, Senior Advocate with Mr. Abhiraj Arora and Shourya Tanay, Advocates i/b ELP for the Respondent. CORAM : Justice Tarun Agarwala, Presiding Officer Justice M.T. Joshi, Judicial Member Ms. Meera Swarup, Technical Member Per : Justice Tarun Agarwala, Presiding Officer (Oral) 1. The present appeal has been filed against the order dated September 30, 2021 passed by the Adjudicating Officer 2 ('AO' for short) of the Securities and Exchange Board of India ('SEBI' for short) imposing a penalty of Rs. 5 lakh for creating artificial volume through reversal trades in the market. 2. Insofar as the delay in the filing of the appeal is concerned, the delay is condoned for the reasons stated therein as well as in view of the order of Supreme Court in Suo Moto Writ Petition (Civil) No. 3 of 2020 dated March 23, 2020, March 8, 2021, April 27, 2021 and January 10, 2022. 3. Having hearing heard the learned counsel for the parties; we find that the controversy involved in the present appeal is squarely covered by the decision of this Tribunal in Global Earth Properties and Developers Pvt. Ltd. vs. SEBI Appeal No. 212 of 2020 decided on September 14, 2020. It was urged that in the meanwhile, the respondent has issued a Settlement Scheme 2022 and that the appellant is entitled for the benefit of that scheme.

4. The prayer that the appellant may be permitted to apply for the Settlement Scheme, 2022 cannot be granted in the facts and circumstances of the present case for the reasons stated hereunder. 5. We find that the AO by an order dated September 30, 2021 had imposed a penalty of Rs. 5 lakh pursuant to the said order. The appellant paid the amount unconditionally on October 28, 2021 and consequently the matter came to an end and a quietus in the matter was achieved. 6. The settlement scheme was issued in August 2022 which permitted certain entities to apply for Settlement. Clause 6 of the Settlement Scheme provides the eligibility criteria of such entities who can apply for settlement which is extracted here under:- 7. A perusal of the Clause 6 would indicate that an entity against whom enforcement proceedings have been approved or initiated and are pending before any authority / forum, viz. Adjudicating Officer/ Hon'ble SAT/Hon'ble Courts/Recovery 4 Officer etc. shall be eligible to avail the one time settlement opportunity. 8. It was contended that the present appeal has been filed and accordingly the appeal is pending and therefore the appellant is eligible for availing the one time settlement scheme under Clause 6 of the Settlement Scheme 2022. 9. The argument so raised seems attractive in the first blush but upon a closer scrutiny we find that the contention so raised lacks merit.

We find that on the date of issuance of the scheme no proceedings were pending against the appellant inasmuch as pursuant to the order of the AO the appellant paid the penalty amount and thus accepted the order passed by the AO. Upon payment of the penalty amount all proceedings came to an end and a quietus in the matter was achieved. Nothing remained pending after the deposit of the penalty amount. 10. Reliance placed by the respondent of the decision of the Supreme Court in the matter of Computwel Systems P. Ltd. vs Hasan (2000) 10 SCC 403 is not applicable in view of the fact that we have condoned the delay in the filing of the appeal. 11. Consequently, since nothing was pending on the date when the scheme was issued the appellant was not eligible to avail the one time settlement opportunity under the Settlement Scheme 2022. Thus, no relief can be granted to the appellant. The appeal fails and is dismissed. 12. This order will be digitally signed by the Private Secretary on behalf of the bench and all concerned parties are directed to act on the digitally signed copy of this order.

Certified copy of this order is also available from the Registry on payment of usual charges. Justice Tarun Agarwala Presiding Officer Justice M.T. Joshi Judicial Member Ms. Meera Swarup Technical Member RAJALA Digitally by signed 12.10.2022 KSHMI NAIR RAJALAKSHMI H Date: 2022.10.14 msb H NAIR 10:28:17 +05'30'