Final Order in the matter of Allied International Computers Asia Ltd

Final Order in the matter of Allied Computers International (Asia) Limited

WTM/AB/IVD/ID7/13161/2021-22 SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA FINAL ORDER UNDER SECTIONS 11(1), 11(4) AND 11B OF THE SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA ACT, 1992

In respect of: Noticee Noticee Name PAN no. 1 Shri Jinesh Devendra Bhatt AKDPB6133C 2 Smt Pooja Jinesh Bhatt AOLPB5611F 3 Shri Deepak Pandurang Vikhape AFCPV3352H 4 Shri Krushnakumar Guruvachan Brahmbhatt ADSPB6848E 5 Smt Prarthana Tarunkumar Brahmbhatt AGLPB2425P 6 Smt Dipika Krushnakumar Brahmbhatt AUTPB8108P 7 M/s Kreative Finsol Private Limited AADCK8879M M/s Aristo Media And Entertainment Private 8 Limited AAICA2155K 9 Smt Naina Sanjeev Malhotra AHXPM7262L 10 Shri Sanjeev Ramesh Malhotra AQDPM3057A 11 Shri Ankit Doshi AIOPD3203G 12 M/s Ethan Constructions Private Limited AACCE2711P 13 Shri Milan Hasmukhrai Deliwala AEBPD5759A 14 Shri Rajendrakumar Munna Prasad Gupta AJUPG3867E 15 M/s Jabeen Tradelink Private Limited AACCJ2408A M/s Black Horse Media And Entertainment 16 Private Limited AADCB5849G 17 M/s Naseen Tradelink Private Limited AADCN1075A 18 Shri Maheshchandra Chunilal Shah AIOPS3870Q 19 Shri Dharmendra Rikhinchandra Shah HUF AAEHD6246F 20 M/s Narois Impex Private Limited AADCN1076D M/s Magan Mercantile Pvt Ltd AAGCM2167D

M/s Avance Technologies Limited AAECA5763B 23 Shri Pritesh H Gala AIJPG6591R 24 Smt Jayvantiben D Dedhia AIRPD0247R 25 Shri Bipin Bapu Kamble BBTPK6916Q 26 Ms Anusaya Shankar Sawant CZQPS7886B 27 Shri Nagmaheshwar Balraj Yellamelli ABLPY9972D 28 M/s Nishottam Traders Private Limited AACCN7655D 29 Shri Mahavirsingh N Chauhan AQOPC6330R 30 Smt Anita Rakeshkumar Ranka ADRPR5359R M/s SKR Supreme Electronics & Trading 31 Private Limited AAECS9028D 32 M/s Coastal Fertilisers Limited AAACH6567J M/s Venkateswara Capital Management 33 Limited AAACH6568H M/s Godavari Commercial Services Private 34 Limited AABCG1461B 35 Shri Alpesh Kanubhai Gohil A0SZPG1756E 36 M/s Sanmay Trading Private Limited AANCS8490A 37 M/s Acacio Tradelink Private Limited AAICA0609G (The aforesaid entities are hereinafter referred to by their respective names / Noticee numbers and collectively as “the Noticees”) In the matter of Allied Computers International (Asia) Limited

1. Present proceedings have emanated from a show cause notice dated July 25, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as “the SCN”), issued by Securities and Exchange Board of India (hereinafter referred to as “SEBI”) to the Noticees for their trading activities in the scrip of Allied Computers International (Asia) Limited (hereinafter referred to as “ACIL”/ “the Company”) during the period from November 23, 2007 to September 22, 2012 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Investigation Period’), alleging therein the violations of Regulations 3(a),(b),(c),(d) and Regulation 4(1), 4(2) (a) and (e) of SEBI (Prevention of Fraudulent and unfair trading activities relating to the Securities Market) Regulations, 2003 (hereinafter referred to as “PFUTP Regulations, 2003”), by the Noticees. The SCN issued to the Noticees, also contained the copies of documents relied upon in the SCNs, which are as detailed below:

Details Annexure No.

1. Basis of Connection of the entities Copies of KYC, MCA documents, off-market details and relevant bank 2. account statements.

3. Trades of the 19 Entities in Patch-V

4. Trades of the 28 Entities in Patch-VI 5. Details of counterparties to preferential allottees

2. Prior to the issue of the SCN, on the basis of a reference received from the Income Tax Department that certain entities could have manipulated the price in the scrip of ACIL, as part of a larger scheme linked to the long term capital gains scam, SEBI had conducted an investigation in the trading activities in the scrip of ACIL.

Show Cause Notice, Replies, Personal Hearing and Submissions:

3. The brief facts and the allegations levelled against the Noticees, as given in the SCN, are as follows:

(i) ACIL deals in Laptop Computers and markets the ACi brand in India and abroad. ACIL is currently undertaking services and maintenance contracts of all brands of laptops computers under PC Protection Plan. The Company got listed on BSE on November 23, 2007.

(ii) It is observed from during investigation that the Company, for FYs 2008, 2010, 2011, 2012 & 2013, registered profits of Rs. 6.59 million, Rs. 0.98 million, Rs. 4.36 million, Rs. 7.55 million and Rs. 1.36 million, respectively. For FY 2009, ACIL registered a loss of Rs. 1.25 million. During the investigation period, corporate announcements made by ACIL broadly included declaration of financial results, split & consolidation of shares and meetings of the Board of Directors of the company.

(iii) The Price Volume data of the scrip on BSE for the period before, during and after the Investigation Period is given as follows:

Table: 1 Avg no of Opening Closing High Price/Vol Low Price/Vol shares Price/ vol on Price/ Vol Period Duration during the during the traded daily 1st day of on last day Period(`) Period(`) during the period(`) of period(`) period Pre-Investigation Listed on BSE on Nov 23, 2007 78.30 21.00 Price 21.00 74.35 Patch-I (18.12.2007) (23.11.2007) 2,579,250 (23.11.2007 – 27,422,665 193,467 18.12.2007) Vol 27,422,665 955,931 Pre-Sub (23.11.2007) (03.12.2007) Division of shares 78.05 3.95 Price 75.55 4.90 Patch-II (19.12.2007) (04.12.2008) 112,814 (19.12.2007 – 1,524,150 1,341 18.12.2008) Vol 1,427,318 371,157 (19.06.2008) (12.11.2008) 0.78 0.35 Price 0.53 0.72 Patch-III n Post-Sub (08.06.2009) (06.03.2009) o Division of 862,117 ti (19.12.2008- i g a s t shares 28.06.2010) Vol 3,159,522 12,343,611 48,150 1,683,852 e v (02.01.2009) (06.02.2010) n I 9.61 1.18 Price 7.25 1.20 Patch-IV (26.07.2010) (26.12.2011) 30,803 (19.07.2010 – 1,133,397 200 26.12.2011)* Vol 201,683 3,685 (26.07.2010) (30.09.2011) Post- Consolidation 6.46 1.17 of shares Patch-V Price 1.26 6.45 (04.05.2012) (27.12.2011) 328,096 (27.12.2011 – 2,845,011 5 04.05.2012) Vol 14,246 1,134,244 (19.04.2012) (03.03.2012) Patch-VI Price 6.57 6.57 1.09 1.30 353,051

Avg no of Opening Closing High Price/Vol Low Price/Vol shares Price/ vol on Price/ Vol Period Duration during the during the traded daily 1st day of on last day Period(`) Period(`) during the period(`) of period(`) period (05.05.2012 – (07.05.2012) (17.09.2012) 22.09.2012) 3,456,705 5 Vol 935,232 745,512 (05.09.2012) (17.05.2012) 1.36 0.54 Price 1.36 0.69 (24.09.2012) (30.11.2012) 23.09.2012- Post-Investigation 208,036 23.12.2012 1,849,208 1,104 Vol 425,387 9,199 (25.09.2012) (10.12.2012) *Trading in the scrip was suspended during the period June 29, 2010 to July 18, 2010 on account of the consolidation of shares. (iv) It is observed during investigation that on the basis of price rise/fall, 6 patches were identified (3 price rise and 3 price fall). During Patch-I (November 23, 2007 – December 18, 2007)- Price rise patch, Patch-II (December 19, 2007 – December 18, 2008)- Price fall patch, Patch-III (December 19, 2008 – June 28, 2010) – Price rise patch and Patch-IV (July 19, 2010 – December 26, 2011) – Price fall patch, no adverse inference has been drawn.

(v) 49 connected entities were identified based on the analysis of KYC details, off-market transfers, MCA documents and bank account statements (of entities contributing >5% to +LTP/-LTP) for Patch-V (December 27, 2011 – May 04, 2012) – Price rise patch and Patch-VI (May 05, 2012 – September 22, 2012) – Price fall patch, which had significant top 10 LTP contribution and were analyzed for the patches V & VI. The said entities are collectively hereinafter referred to as “connected entities” or “the group”. The basis of connection is provided at Annexure 1 of the SCN. The copies of KYC, MCA documents, off-market details and relevant bank account statements were provided at Annexure 2 of the SCN. From analysis of KYC details, off-market & bank statements (of entities contributing >5% to +LTP/-LTP), no connection of the company with the connected entities could be established.

Patch-V (December 27, 2011 – May 04, 2012) – Price rise patch (vi) 18 entities out of identified group of 49 connected entities have bought shares of ACIL during the said patch. The buy LTP analysis of the aforesaid 18 entities was carried out, the details of which is as follows:

Table: 2 (vii) As seen from above table, it was observed that entities at S.No. 1-9 contributed to net +LTP, entities at S.No. 10-11 contributed to net 0 LTP and the remaining entities contributed to net –LTP. The group entities contributed Rs. 23.60 (67.37% of the market +LTP) to the market +LTP. It was also observed that the net LTP contribution of the entities at S.No.1-9 was Rs. 6.92 in comparison to market net LTP of Rs. 5.25. Hence, the +LTP trades of entities at S.No. 1-9 have contributed significantly to the market net LTP.

(viii) From the trade analysis, it was observed that 21 group entities had traded among themselves during patch-V. The details of +LTP trades (trades by 19 entities out of the said 21 group entities) are as follows: S .N o

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 B u y e r N a m e

D H A R M E N D R A R IK H IN C H A N D R A S H A H M A H A V IR S IN G H N C H A U H A N JIN E S H D E V E N D R A B H A T T S A N JE E V R A M E S H M A L H O T R A N A S E E N T R A D E L IN K P R IV A T E L IM IT E D P O O JA JIN E S H B H A T T D IP IK A K R U S H N A K U M A R B R A H M B H A T T N A IN A S A N JE E V M A L H O T R A R A JE N D R A K U M A R M U N N A P R A S A D G U P T A A L P E S H K U M A R K A N U B H A I G O H IL M A H E S H C H A N D R A C H U N IL A L S H A H JA S M IN S B A JO R IY A

D E E P A K P A N D U R A N G V IK H A P E

S A N M A Y T R A D IN G P R IV A T E L IM IT E D A R IS T O M E D IA A N D E N T E R T A IN M E N T P R IV A T E L IM E T H A N C O N S T R U C T IO N S P R IV A T E L IM IT E D G ro u p T o ta l M a rk e t T o ta l IT E D im

p a c t in `1 .8 9 1 .6 3 1 .3 2 1 .2 7 0 .4 4 0 .1 5 0 .1 3 0 .0 8 0 .0 1 0 .0 0 0 .0 0 -0 .0 1 -0 .0 1 -0 .0 2 -0 .0 3 -0 .0 8 -0 .7 5 -0 .7 6 5 .2 6 5 .2 5 A ll T ra d e s Q T Y tra d e d 2 8 5 ,2 2 1 6 2 8 3 ,8 9 0 ,0 4 1 3 ,7 4 9 ,3 9 2 8 ,6 9 1 3 5 7 ,6 7 9 1 ,0 9 0 ,8 0 0 3 7 3 ,6 1 0 4 0 ,0 0 0 5 6 ,0 0 0 1 0 2 0 ,0 0 0 1 9 7 ,4 1 0 4 0 8 ,5 0 2 6 9 2 ,9 3 9 2 7 1 ,0 5 0 2 ,1 9 5 ,4 2 1 1 ,1 2 5 ,2 6 1 1 4 ,7 6 2 ,6 5 5 2 9 ,8 5 6 ,7 6 1 N o o f tra d e s 8 1 4 3 4 8 5 5 7 7 1 9 1 2 0 1 4 0 1 0 6 1 5 1 6 4 2 4 7 7 7 0 4 8 1 ,0 1 1 4 3 2 5 ,2 1 2 8 ,8 2 4 im

p a c t in `8 .8 4 2 .0 2 2 .2 5 2 .0 7 0 .4 5 0 .6 3 0 .3 6 0 .1 6 0 .0 1 0 .0 0 0 .0 0 0 .0 0 0 .1 4 0 .0 1 2 .0 3 0 .0 2 3 .7 5 0 .8 6 2 3 .6 0 3 5 .0 3 LT P D iff > 0 Q T Y tra d e d 1 6 ,3 9 8 7 7 1 7 0 ,8 8 3 6 1 2 ,2 8 9 1 4 0 3 5 ,6 2 7 4 6 ,0 5 6 1 7 ,7 0 0 4 0 ,0 0 0 - - - 4 3 ,5 0 0 1 0 0 3 2 ,4 6 4 1 ,0 0 0 1 9 7 ,1 9 9 5 7 ,5 4 5 1 ,2 7 0 ,9 7 8 1 ,9 3 6 ,5 0 9 N o o f tra d e s 1 4 8 2 2 4 5 5 8 5 2 5 1 2 4 1 - - - 6 1 7 7 1 1 2 9 3 7 5 7 1 8 3 8

im p a c t in ` -6 .9 5 -0 .3 9 -0 .9 3 -0 .8 0 -0 .0 1 -0 .4 8 -0 .2 3 -0 .0 8 0 .0 0 0 .0 0 0 .0 0 -0 .0 1 -0 .1 5 -0 .0 3 -2 .0 6 -0 .1 0 -4 .5 0 -1 .6 2 -1 8 .3 4 -2 9 .7 8 LT P D iff < 0 Q T Y tra d e d 4 1 ,6 5 6 5 1 2 6 1 ,1 8 9 1 4 9 ,6 0 3 1 0 0 1 3 ,9 6 7 1 0 3 ,6 5 4 9 ,5 6 3 - - - 1 0 ,3 0 0 3 ,1 2 3 2 ,3 5 0 2 6 ,1 9 4 7 ,3 9 3 3 9 5 ,4 8 6 1 6 8 ,2 4 5 9 9 3 ,3 3 5 1 ,4 3 9 ,5 3 8 N o o f tra d e s 1 5 2 1 1 5 5 5 1 1 3 5 9 6 - - - 1 1 4 2 1 6 5 5 3 2 4 1 0 9 9 4 0 1 ,1 4 4 LT P D iff = Q T Y tra d e d 2 2 7 ,1 6 7 3 9 3 ,6 5 7 ,9 6 9 2 ,9 8 7 ,5 0 0 8 ,4 5 1 3 0 8 ,0 8 5 9 4 1 ,0 9 0 3 4 6 ,3 4 7 - 5 6 ,0 0 0 1 0 9 ,7 0 0 1 5 0 ,7 8 7 4 0 6 ,0 5 2 6 3 4 ,2 8 1 2 6 2 ,6 5 7 1 ,6 0 2 ,7 3 6 8 9 9 ,4 7 1 1 2 ,4 9 8 ,3 4 2 2 6 ,4 8 0 ,7 1 4 0 N o o f tra d e s 5 1 4 1 7 5 5 6 6 2 3 6 0 1 1 9 9 6 - 5 1 5 2 2 4 4 5 2 8 4 2 5 5 8 2 8 6 3 ,7 0 1 6 ,8 4 2 %T o f + L T P to o ta l M a rk e t + L T P 2 5 .2 4 5 .7 7 6 .4 2 5 .9 1 1 .2 9 1 .8 0 1 .0 3 0 .4 6 0 .0 3 0 .0 0 0 .0 0 0 .0 0 0 .4 0 0 .0 3 5 .8 0 0 .0 6 1 0 .7 1 2 .4 6 6 7 .3 7 1 0 0 .0 0

Table: 3 +LTP trades as buyer with group +LTP trades as seller with group +LTP as S. entities entities buyer & No Entity Name +LTP % of +LTP % of No. of No. of seller (in. (in Qty mkt (in Qty mkt trades trades Rs.) Rs.) +LTP Rs) +LTP Dharmendra Rikhinchandra 42 3.65 67 36,78 10.41 1 1.55 7,264 4.42 Shah 1 5.2 Aristo Media and Entertainment 32 83,11 2.11 2 1.28 58 96,743 3.65 0.74 2.02 Private Limited 6 3 Nagmaheshwar Balraj Yellamelli 0.95 38 18,184 2.71 0 0 0 0 0.95 4 Mahavirsingh N Chauhan 0.85 7 25 2.43 0 0 0 0 0.85 0.10 6 67,12 0.29 5 0.65 23 362,287 1.86 Sanjeev Ramesh Malhotra 5 0.75 Naseen Tradelink Private 0 0 0 0 6 0.45 5 1 4 0 1 .28 Limited 0.45 Ethan Constructions Private 0.64 33 89,49 1.82 7 0.43 16 29,445 1.23 Limited 1 1.07 0.13 6 45,21 0.37 8 0.33 8 5 8, 5 8 2 0 .94 Jinesh Devendra Bhatt 2 0.46 9 Pooja Jinesh Bhatt 0.2 7 3 2, 8 0 6 0. 5 7 0.07 2 351 0.20 0.27 Dipika Krushnakumar 0.18 13 82,45 0.51 10 0.11 3 3,855 0.31 Brahmbhatt 3 0.29 Krushnakumar Guruvachan 0.54 32 39,76 1.54 11 0.02 2 43,100 0.06 Brahmbhatt 8 0.56 12 Deepak Pandurang Vikhape 0.01 1 100 0.03 0 0 0 0 0.01 Rajendrakumar Munna Prasad 0 0 0 0 13 0.01 1 40,000 0.03 Gupta 0.01 14 Alpeshkumar Kanubhai Gohil 0 0 0 0 0.01 1 1,669 0.03 0.01 Sanmay Trading Private Limited 0 0 0 0 0.38 10 233,1 1.08 15 80 0.38 16 Maheshchandra Chunilal Shah 0 0 0 0 0.22 2 20 0.63 0.22 17 Anusaya Shankar Sawant 0 0 0 0 0.16 5 1,806 0.46 0.16 18 Bipin Bapu Kamble 0 0 0 0 0.01 1 1,559 0.03 0.01 Jabeen Tradelink Private Limited 0 0 0 0 0.01 1 10,00 0.03 19 0 0.01 Group Total 6.84 211 692,531 19.53 6.84 211 692,5 19.53 - 31 (ix) As can be seen from the table above, by trading among themselves, the group of connected entities contributed Rs. 6.84, which is 19.53% of the market +LTP. Further, the entities at S.No. 14-19 had aided other connected entities (S.No. 1-13) by selling shares to increase the scrip price. In view of the significant +LTP contribution by the group of connected entities by trading among themselves, it is alleged that the connected entities listed at the table above manipulated the price of the scrip by entering into trades resulting in price rise which has resulted in the alleged violation of Regulations 3(a),(b),(c) & (d) and 4(1), 4(2)(a&(e) of PFUTP Regulations. Trades of the 19 entities were provided as Annexure 3 to the SCN.

Patch-VI (May 05, 2012 – September 22, 2012) – Price fall patch (x) 36 entities out of identified group of 49 connected entities have sold shares of ACIL during the said patch. The sell LTP analysis of the aforesaid 36 entities was carried out, the details of which is as follows:

Table: 4 All Trades LTP Diff >0 LTP Diff <0 LTP Diff = 0 % of -LTP LTP LTP LTP S.No. Seller Name No of No of No of No of to Total impact QTY traded impact QTY traded impact QTY traded QTY traded trades trades trades trades Market -LTP in ` in ` in ` 1ANITA RAKESHKUMAR RANKA -0.93 2 90,999 1 46 0.34 5 7,108 1 8 -1.27 7 3,789 3 2 1 60,102 9 6 3.87 2DHARMENDRA RIKHINCHANDRA SHAH -0.89 2 44,142 3 9 0.00 - - -0.89 1 ,609 1 2 2 42,533 2 7 2.71 3NISHOTTAM TRADERS PRIVATE LIMITED -0.61 1 ,502,382 3 69 0.82 9 9,433 2 6 -1.43 4 84,476 8 5 9 18,473 2 58 4.35 4SANJEEV RAMESH MALHOTRA -0.53 1 ,370,613 3 32 0.38 9 1,340 1 9 -0.91 1 8,540 2 5 1 ,260,733 2 88 2.77 5NAINA SANJEEV MALHOTRA -0.43 1 ,289,712 2 26 0.11 1 51,533 5 -0.54 1 00,410 1 2 1 ,037,769 2 09 1.64 6NAGMAHESHWAR BALRAJ YELLAMELLI -0.37 6 5,005 3 3 0.01 5 1 -0.38 1 1,000 2 0 5 4,000 1 2 1.16 7JINESH DEVENDRA BHATT -0.32 1 ,768,086 5 34 0.17 6 8,879 5 -0.49 1 1,896 6 1 ,687,311 5 23 1.49 8DIPIKA KRUSHNAKUMAR BRAHMBHATT -0.28 1 ,050,130 2 92 0.02 6 00 2 -0.30 9 0,990 1 5 9 58,540 2 75 0.91 9VENKATESWARA CAPITAL MANAGEMENT LTD -0.20 5 25,000 2 4 0.01 2 5,000 1 -0.21 4 80,985 2 1 1 9,015 2 0.64 10SKR SUPREME ELECTRONICS & TRADING PRIVATE LIMITED -0.18 9 29,000 6 8 0.00 - - -0.18 1 83,550 8 7 45,450 6 0 0.55 11GODAVARI COMMERCIAL SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED -0.13 2 ,200,000 2 5 0.02 1 00,000 1 -0.15 1 ,575,000 1 0 5 25,000 1 4 0.46 12MAHAVIRSINGH N CHAUHAN -0.12 6 24 2 0.00 - - -0.12 1 1 6 23 1 0.37 13ALPESHKUMAR KANUBHAI GOHIL -0.09 9 7,509 2 7 0.01 5 ,000 1 -0.10 4 ,993 3 8 7,516 2 3 0.30 14BLACK HORSE MEDIA AND ENTERTAINMENT PRIVATE LIMITED -0.04 2 1,600 7 0.00 - - -0.04 7 ,848 4 1 3,752 3 0.12 15NAROIS IMPEX PRIVATE LIMITED -0.04 3 81,000 3 2 0.00 - - -0.04 3 ,929 4 3 77,071 2 8 0.12 16ANKIT DOSHI -0.03 3 0,000 5 1 0.01 5 1 -0.04 1 ,250 4 2 8,745 4 6 0.12 17AKANSHA MEDIA AND ENTERTAINMENT PRIVATE LIMITED -0.02 2 09,000 1 0 0.00 - - -0.02 2 7,700 2 1 81,300 8 0.06 18MILAN HASMUKHRAI DELIWALA -0.02 4 0,000 6 0.00 - - -0.02 1 0,000 2 3 0,000 4 0.06 19AVANCE TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED -0.01 2 84,961 1 8 0.00 - - -0.01 1 00 1 2 84,861 1 7 0.03 20PRARTHANA TARUNKUMAR BRAHMBHATT -0.01 1 85,000 5 5 0.13 8 ,011 3 -0.14 1 5,644 1 0 1 61,345 4 2 0.43 21PRITESH H GALA -0.01 5 0,000 3 7 0.08 4 ,226 4 -0.09 4 ,065 9 4 1,709 2 4 0.27 22BLACK HORSE MEDIA AND ENTERTAINMENT PRIVATE LIMIED 0.00 5 1,000 2 0 0.00 - - 0.00 - - 5 1,000 2 0 0.00 23CHAMPAKLAL JETHALAL SHAH 0.00 2 50,000 1 1 0.00 - - 0.00 - - 2 50,000 1 1 0.00 24KREATIVE FINSOL PRIVATE LIMITED 0.00 1 0,000 1 0.00 - - 0.00 - - 1 0,000 1 0.00 25MAGAN MERCANTILE PVT LTD 0.00 1 ,058,000 7 8 0.00 - - 0.00 - - 1 ,058,000 7 8 0.00 26RAJENDRAKUMAR MUNNA PRASAD GUPTA 0.00 4 0,000 2 6 0.10 1 ,150 4 -0.10 1 3,431 8 2 5,419 1 4 0.30 27SANMAY TRADING PRIVATE LIMITED 0.00 2 00,000 1 5 0.00 - - 0.00 - - 2 00,000 1 5 0.00 28SAURABHKUMAR RASIKLAL GANDHI 0.00 5 0,000 1 06 0.00 - - 0.00 - - 5 0,000 1 06 0.00 29YADON CONSTRUCTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED 0.00 6 ,500 4 0.00 - - 0.00 - - 6 ,500 4 0.00 30ANUSAYA SHANKAR SAWANT 0.04 1 2,500 1 1 0.09 5 00 1 -0.05 6 00 5 1 1,400 5 0.15 31NASEEN TRADELINK PRIVATE LIMITED 0.06 4 63,500 9 4 0.09 8 ,461 3 -0.03 5 ,449 2 4 49,590 8 9 0.09 32TARUNKUMAR GURUCHARAN BRAHMBHATT 0.07 2 5,000 7 0.07 1 1 0.00 - - 2 4,999 6 0.00 33ACACIO TRADELINK PRIVATE LIMITED 0.09 3 ,628,294 2 45 0.12 2 81,500 4 -0.03 8 0,534 3 3 ,266,260 2 38 0.09 34JAYVANTIBEN D DEDHIA 0.21 5 0,000 3 5 0.27 1 1,172 1 0 -0.06 1 ,725 5 3 7,103 2 0 0.18 35ETHAN CONSTRUCTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED 0.25 3 34,828 1 33 0.30 4 8,543 2 4 -0.05 1 3,659 5 2 72,626 1 04 0.15 36ARISTO MEDIA AND ENTERTAINMENT PRIVATE LIMITED 0.61 9 89,731 3 85 1.21 1 07,095 5 9 -0.60 1 9,457 2 1 8 63,179 3 05 1.83 Group Total -3.93 19,704,116 3 ,504 4.36 1,069,562 1 93 -8.29 3,242,630 335 15,391,924 2,976 25.22 Market Total -5.15 34,599,030 11,172 27.70 2,112,310 8 65 -32.85 4,485,169 1,527 28,001,551 8,780 100.00 (xi) As seen from above table, it was observed that entities at S.No.

1-21 contributed to net -LTP, entities at S.No. 22-29 contributed to net 0 LTP and the remaining entities contributed to net +LTP. The group entities contributed Rs.-8.29 (25.22% of the market -LTP) to the market -LTP. It was also observed that the net LTP contribution of the entities at S.No.1-21 was Rs. -

5.26 in comparison to market net LTP of Rs. -5.15. Hence, the -LTP trades of entities at S.No. 1-21 have contributed significantly to the market net LTP.

(xii) From the trade analysis, it was observed that 39 group entities had traded among themselves during patch-VI. The details of -LTP trades (trades by 28 entities out of the said 39 group entities) are as follows:

Table: 5 -LTP trades as seller with group entities -LTP trades as buyer with group entities -LTP as S. buyer & Entity Name -LTP No. of % of mkt -LTP No. of % of mkt - No. Qty Qty seller (in (in Rs.) trades -LTP (in Rs.) trades LTP Rs.) 1 Nishottam Traders Private -0.92 47 245,280 - 2. 8 0 -0.37 11 1,270 1. 1 3 Limited -1.29 2 Dharmendra Rikhinchandra -0.64 7 1,502 - 1. 9 5 - 0.05 1 5 0. 1 5 Shah -0.69 3 Anita Rakeshkumar Ranka -0.46 17 39,248 - 1. 4 0 -0.38 10 56,343 1.16 -0.84 4 Aristo Media And -0.34 13 10,855 - 1. 0 4 -0.65 37 1.98 Entertainment Private Limited 63,268 -0.99 5 Nagmaheshwar Balraj -0.24 16 10,700 - 0. 7 3 0 0 0 0 Yellamelli -0.24 6 Venkateswara Capital -0.21 21 480,985 - 0. 6 4 -0.06 5 675,000 0. 1 8 Management Ltd -0.27 7 Sanjeev Ramesh Malhotra -0.19 10 1,282 -0.58 -0.16 14 40,321 0. 4 9 -0.35 8 Godavari Commercial Services -0.11 8 1,549,994 - 0. 3 3 0 0 0 0 Private Limited -0.11 9 Prarthana Tarunkumar -0.1 6 7,194 - 0. 3 0 0 0 0 0 Brahmbhatt -0.1 10 Rajendrakumar Munna Prasad -0.09 7 13,281 - 0. 2 7 0 0 0 0 Gupta -0.09 11 Alpeshkumar Kanubhai Gohil -0.07 2 4,098 - 0. 2 1 -0.1 2 50,015 0.30 -0.17 12 Pritesh H Gala -0.06 6 1,875 - 0. 1 8 0 0 0 0 -0.06 13 Jayvantiben D Dedhia -0.06 5 1,725 - 0. 1 8 0 0 0 0 -0.06 14 Dipika Krushnakumar -0.06 6 16,590 - 0. 1 8 -0.03 3 56,000 0. 0 9 Brahmbhatt -0.09 15 Naina Sanjeev Malhotra -0.04 4 54,000 - 0. 1 2 -0.43 32 96,436 1. 3 1 -0.47 16 Ankit Doshi -0.04 4 1,250 - 0. 1 2 0 0 0 0 -0.04 17 SKR Supreme Electronics & -0.04 4 3,550 - 0. 1 2 - 0.13 5 6,050 0. 4 0 Trading Private Limited -0.17 18 Black Horse Media and -0.04 4 7,848 - 0. 1 2 0 0 0 0 Entertainment Private Limited -0.04 19 Acacio Tradelink Private -0.02 2 65,000 - 0. 0 6 0 0 0 0 Limited -0.02 20 Narois Impex Private Limited -0.02 2 450 - 0. 0 6 - 0. 03 2 2,570 0. 0 9 -0.05 21 Naseen Tradelink Private -0.02 1 449 - 0. 0 6 - 0. 77 13 32,505 2. 3 4 Limited -0.79 22 Milan Hasmukhrai Deliwala -0.01 1 5,008 - 0. 0 3 0 0 0 0 -0.01 23 Avance Technologies Limited -0.01 1 100 - 0. 0 3 0 0 0 0 -0.01 24 Coastal Fertilisers Limited 0 0 0 0 -0.26 24 1,355,979 0. 7 9 -0.26 25 Ethan Constructions Private 0 0 0 0 -0.12 11 12,450 0. 3 7 Limited -0.12 26 Jinesh Devendra Bhatt 0 0 0 0 -0.19 19 4,005 0. 5 8 -0.19 27 KREATIVE FINSOL PRIVATE 0 0 0 0 -0.02 1 449 0. 0 6 LIMITED -0.02 28 Magan Mercantile Pvt Ltd 0 0 0 0 -0.02 2 65,000 0. 0 6 -0.02 Group Total -3.79 192 2,517,666 11.48 -3.77 192 2,517,666 11.48 (xiii) As can be seen from the table above, by trading among themselves, the group of connected entities contributed Rs.-3.79, which is 11.48% of the market -LTP.

Further, the entities at S.No. 24-28 had aided other connected entities (S.No. 1-23) by buying shares to decrease the scrip price. In view of the significant -LTP contribution by the group of connected entities by trading among themselves, it is alleged that the connected entities listed at the table above manipulated the price of the scrip by entering into trades resulting in price fall which has resulted in the alleged violation of Regulations 3(a),(b),(c) & (d) and 4(1), 4(2)(a),(e) of PFUTP Regulations. Trades of the 28 entities were provided as Annexure 4 to the SCN.

(xiv) The details of entities that indulged in price manipulation and whose net sell value (sell value – buy value) was Rs. 50 Lakh or more during the IP is tabulated below –

Table: 6 S.No. Entity Name Buy Qty Buy Value Sell Qty Sell Value Net Sell (in Rs) (in Rs) Value (in Rs) 1 Sanmay Trading Private 5,758,190 25,957,761 2 4, 3 63,778 Limited 271,051 1,593,983 2 Acacio Tradelink Private 0 0 3,628,294 7,402,241 7, 402,241 Limited The above 2 entities were allotted shares of ACIL on a preferential basis.

(xv) It is observed that ACIL had allotted 89,205,000 convertible equity warrants (20 allottees) on March 01, 2011 and 10,795,000 convertible equity warrants (3 allottees) on March 24, 2011 on preferential basis, which was subsequently, converted into shares (issue price of Rs.10/- per share) and issued to the allottees (corporate announcements dated May 19 & 24, 2011), the details of which are as under:

Table: 7

S.No. Name of Proposed Allottee PAN No. of shares March 01, 2011 1. M/s Jayalalita Commodities Pvt Ltd AACCJ2406Q 4,500,000 2. M/s Jabeen Tradelink Pvt Ltd AACCJ2408A 4,825,000 3. M/s Acacio Tradelink Pvt Ltd AAICA0609G 4,625,000 4. M/s Amazing Suppliers Pvt Ltd AAICA0737H 4,775,000

5. M/s Abijah Real Estate Pvt Ltd AAICA0617L 4,925,000 6. M/s Aristo Media & Entertainment Pvt Ltd AAICA2155K 4,875,000 7. M/s Agrata Real Estate Pvt Ltd AAHCA2834J 4,675,000 8. M/s Anvita Trading Co Pvt Ltd AAICA2158E 4,775,000 9. M/s Meritorious Realty Pvt Ltd AAGCM3629L 4,925,000 10. M/s Sanmay Trading Pvt Ltd AANCS8490A 4,975,000 11. M/s Sally Real Estate Pvt Ltd AANCS8549Q 3,500,000 12. M/s Anvita Real Estate Pvt Ltd AAICA2157M 3,875,000 13. M/s Marisha Real Estate Pvt Ltd AAGCM3630B 4,875,000 14. M/s Energy Commotrade Pvt Ltd AABCE9136D 4,000,000 15. M/s Rosewood Vintrade Pvt Ltd AAECR2815D 3,105,000 16. M/s Trend Commosales Pvt Ltd AADCT1329B 4,500,000 17. M/s Samjhauta Mercantile Pvt Ltd AAECS9980Q 4,125,000 18. M/s Akansha Media & Entertainment Pvt Ltd AAICA2156L 4,425,000 19. M/s Viaggio Entertainment Pvt Ltd AACCV0634L 4,250,000 20. M/s Adamina Traders Pvt Ltd AAICA0681J 4,675,000 Total 89,205,000

March 24, 2011 1. M/s Rosewood Vintrade Pvt Ltd AAECR2815D 1,795,000 2. M/s Avance Technologies Limited AAECA5763B 4,450,000 3. M/s Mahan Industries Limited AABCM0370P 4,550,000 Total 10,795,000 (xvi) It was observed that among the preferential allottees, only 8 entities had traded in the scrip of ACIL during the IP. The details of the allottees who have sold during the IP is as under: Table: 8 Total Sell Qty sold to Sell Trade Value S.No. Client Name Gross Sell Value (in Rs.) connected with connected entities entities (in Rs.) M/s Jabeen Tradelink Pvt 3,795,000 1. 950,000 789,500 3,140,160 Ltd M/s Acacio Tradelink Pvt 7,402,241 2. 3,628,294 1,600,604 2,583,690 Ltd M/s Abijah Real Estate Pvt 5,009,428 3. 1,118,176 0 0 Ltd M/s Aristo Media & 4. 3,961,733 15,686,971 1,083,739 3,609,515 Entertainment Pvt Ltd M/s Sanmay Trading Pvt 25,957,760 5. 5,758,190 2,587,448 10,975,789 Ltd M/s Akansha Media & 6. 209,000 478,520 0 0 Entertainment Pvt Ltd M/s Avance Technologies 7. 284,961 1,053,298 234,271 862,126 Limited Total 15,910,354 59,383,218 6,295,562 21,171,280 (xvii) As can be seen from the above table, the preferential allottees have sold 15,910,354 shares amounting to approx. Rs. 5.93 Cr out of which connected entities bought 6,295,562 (39.56% of total sell quantity) valuing approx. Rs.

2.11 Cr. The details of counterparties to preferential allottees was placed as Annexure 5 to the SCN.

(xviii) Hence, 37 entities mentioned in the tables at sub-paras (viii) and (xii) above were called upon to show cause as to why directions under Sections 11(1), 11(4) and 11B of the SEBI Act should not be issued against them for the aforesaid alleged violations under PFUTP Regulations, committed while trading during Patch V and VI of the Investigation Period.

4. The SCN dated August, 2017, was served upon 37 Noticees by way of registered post and in some cases by way of substituted service, viz. affixture and newspaper publication. The details of the delivery of SCN is as given below: Table: 9 Noticee SCN Delivery Mode of Delivery Noticee Name no. Status Shri Jinesh Devendra Bhatt Delivered Registered Post 1 Smt Pooja Jinesh Bhatt Delivered Registered Post 2 Shri Deepak Pandurang Delivered Registered Post 3 Vikhape Shri Krushnakumar Guruvachan Delivered Registered Post 4 Brahmbhatt Smt Prarthana Tarunkumar Delivered Registered Post 5 Brahmbhatt Smt Dipika Krushnakumar Delivered Registered Post 6 Brahmbhatt M/s Kreative Finsol Private Delivered Affixture 7 Limited M/s Aristo Media And Delivered Affixture 8 Entertainment Private Limited Smt Naina Sanjeev Malhotra Delivered Registered Post 9 Shri Sanjeev Ramesh Malhotra Delivered Registered Post 10 Shri Ankit Doshi Delivered Registered Post 11 M/s Ethan Constructions Private Delivered Affixture 12 Limited Shri Milan Hasmukhrai Deliwala Delivered Registered Post 13 Shri Rajendrakumar Munna Delivered Affixture 14 Prasad Gupta M/s Jabeen Tradelink Private Delivered Affixture 15 Limited M/s Black Horse Media And Delivered Affixture 16 Entertainment Private Limited M/s Naseen Tradelink Private Delivered Registered Post Limited

Shri Maheshchandra Chunilal Delivered Registered Post Shah Shri Dharmendra Rikhinchandra Delivered Registered Post 19 Shah HUF M/s Narois Impex Private Delivered Affixture 20 Limited M/s Magan Mercantile Pvt Ltd Delivered Affixture 21 M/s Avance Technologies Delivered Affixture 22 Limited Shri Pritesh H Gala Delivered Affixture 23 Smt Jayvantiben D Dedhia Delivered Affixture 24 Shri Bipin Bapu Kamble Delivered Registered Post 25 Ms Anusaya Shankar Sawant Delivered Registered Post 26 Shri Nagmaheshwar Balraj Delivered Affixture 27 Yellamelli M/s Nishottam Traders Private Delivered Registered Post 28 Limited Shri Mahavirsingh N Chauhan Delivered Registered Post 29 Smt Anita Rakeshkumar Ranka Delivered Registered Post 30 M/s SKR Supreme Electronics Delivered Affixture 31 & Trading Private Limited M/s Coastal Fertilisers Limited Delivered Hand Delivery 32 M/s Venkateswara Capital Delivered Hand Delivery 33 Management Limited M/s Godavari Commercial Delivered Hand Delivery 34 Services Private Limited Shri Alpesh Kanubhai Gohil Delivered Registered Post 35 M/s Sanmay Trading Private Delivered Affixture 36 Limited M/s Acacio Tradelink Private Delivered Registered Post 37 Limited

5. After completion of service of SCN, the matter came to be placed before another Whole Time Member but it could not be proceeded further due to internal re-allocation of cases amongst the Whole Time Members of SEBI. In January 2020, the matter finally came to be assigned to the undersigned for granting of personal hearing and subsequent determination. I note that Noticee no. 1 to 5, 7, 9, 10, 13, 20, 22, 25, 27, 29, 30, 32, 33 and 36, have filed their reply to the SCN. No reply has been filed by Noticee no. 6, 8, 11, 12, 14 to 19, 21, 23, 24, 26, 28, 31, 34, 35 and 37.

6. The personal hearing in the present matter were conducted on July 10, 2020, August 26, 2020, November 03, 2020, December 23, 2020, February 01, 2021, and March 03, 2021. Hearing for Noticees no. 4, 5, 6 and 36 was conducted on July 10, 2020, hearing for Noticee no. 20 was conducted on August 26, 2020, hearing for Noticees no. 9, 10, 13, 19, 25, 26 and 30 was conducted on November 03, 2020, hearing for Noticee no. 22 was conducted on December 23, 2020 and hearing for Noticee no. 1 and 2 was conducted on February 01, 2021. Noticee no. 21 has filed his reply and submitted that he does not wish to avail personal hearing in the matter. Noticees no. 3, 7, 8, 11, 12, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 23, 24, 27, 28, 29, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 and 37 were given two opportunities for personal hearing but the Noticees did not appear on the scheduled dates and neither did they seek adjournment for the same. Details of the delivery of hearing Notice is as given below:

Table: 10 Noticee Noticee Name Details/Mode of Delivery of Hearing Notice Date of hearing no. conducted 1 Shri Jinesh Hearing notice dated 28/09/2020 served through February 01, 2021 Devendra Bhatt SPAD. Reply received through Email for adjournment. Email dated 25/11/2020 sent to Noticee for hearing on 23/12/2020. Vide email dated 22/12/2020 entity sought adjournment. Vide email dated 08/01/2021, another opportunity of hearing granted on 01/02/2021. 2 Smt Pooja Jinesh Hearing notice dated 28/09/2020 served through February 01, 2021 Bhatt SPAD. Reply received through Email for adjournment. Email dated 25/11/2020 sent to Noticee for hearing on 23/12/2020. Vide email dated 22/12/2020 entity sought adjournment. Vide email dated 08/01/2021, another opportunity of hearing granted on 01/02/2021. 3 Shri Deepak Hearing notice dated 28/09/2020 served through Did not appear for Pandurang SPAD. Hearing notice dated 02/12/2020 served hearings or seek Vikhape through SPAD. Reply received through Email. adjournment. 4 Shri Krushnakumar Hearing Notice delivered. July 10, 2020 Guruvachan Brahmbhatt 5 Smt Prarthana Hearing Notice delivered. July 10, 2020 Tarunkumar Brahmbhatt 6 Smt Dipika Hearing Notice delivered July 10, 2020 Krushnakumar Brahmbhatt 7 M/s Kreative Finsol Hearing notice dated 28/09/2020 not delivered Did not appear for Private Limited through SPAD. Newspaper publication done on hearings or seek 24/10/2020 (for hearing on 03/11/ 2020) and adjournment. 14/12/2020 (for hearing on 23/12/2020)

8 M/s Aristo Media Hearing notice dated 28/09/2020 not delivered Did not appear for And Entertainment through SPAD. Newspaper publication done on hearings or seek Private Limited 24/10/2020 (for hearing on 03/11/2020) and adjournment. 14/12/2020 (for hearing on 23/12/2020) 9 Smt Naina Sanjeev Hearing notice dated 28/09/2020 served through November 03, 2020 Malhotra SPAD. Vide email dated 05/10/2020 entity stated that it had not received SCN. SCN served on the entities through Advocate. Advocate raised certain issues vide email dated 09/10/2020 which were addressed vide email dated 13/10/2020. 10 Shri Sanjeev Hearing notice dated 28/09/2020 served through November 03, 2020 Ramesh Malhotra SPAD. Vide email dated 05/10/2020 entity stated that it had not received SCN. SCN served on the entities through Advocate. Advocate raised certain issues vide email dated 09/10/2020 which were address vide email dated 13/10/2020. 11 Shri Ankit Doshi Hearing notice dated 28/09/2020, served through Did not appear for SPAD. Hearing notice dated 02/12/2020 served hearings or seek to Noticee through SPAD. adjournment.

12 M/s Ethan Hearing notice dated 25/10/2020 could not be Did not appear for Constructions delivered through SPAD (for hearing on hearings or seek Private Limited 03/11/2020). Newspaper publication done on adjournment. 14/12/2020 (for hearing on 23/12/2020) 13 Shri Milan Hearing notice dated 28/09/2020 served through November 03, 2020 Hasmukhrai SPAD. Confirmation received on Email. Deliwala 14 Shri Hearing notice dated 28/09/2020 could not be Did not appear for Rajendrakumar delivered to entity through SPAD. Newspaper hearings or seek Munna Prasad publication done on 24/10/2020 (for hearing on adjournment. Gupta 03/11/2020) and 14/12/2020 (for hearing on 23/12/2020) 15 M/s Jabeen Hearing notice dated 25/10/2020 could not be Did not appear for Tradelink Private delivered through SPAD (for hearing on hearings or seek Limited 03/11/2020). Newspaper publication done on adjournment. 14/12/2020 (for hearing on 23/12/2020) 16 M/s Black Horse Hearing notice dated 25/10/2020 could not be Did not appear for Media And delivered through SPAD (for hearing on hearings or seek Entertainment 03/11/2020).

Newspaper publication done on adjournment. Private Limited 14/12/2020 (for hearing on 23/12/2020) 17 M/s Naseen Hearing notice dated 25/10/2020 could not be Did not appear for Tradelink Private delivered through SPAD (for hearing on hearings or seek Limited 03/11/2020). Newspaper publication done on adjournment. 14/12/2020 (for hearing on 23/12/2020) 18 Shri Hearing notice dated 28/09/2020 served through Did not appear for Maheshchandra SPAD. Hearing notice dated 02/12/2020 served hearings or seek Chunilal Shah through SPAD. adjournment. 19 Shri Dharmendra Vide email dated 14/10/2020 intimation of November 03, 2020 Rikhinchandra hearing for 03/11/2020 sent to entity. Received Shah HUF confirmation through Email dated 28/10/2020. 20 M/s Narois Impex Hearing Notice delivered. August 26, 2020 Private Limited 21 M/s Magan Vide letter dated 03/12/2020, the Noticee NA Mercantile Pvt Ltd submitted that he does not wish to avail personal hearing in the matter 22 M/s Avance Vide email dated 29/09/2020 intimation was sent December 23, 2020 Technologies to the entity regarding hearing on 03/12/2020.

Limited Vide email dated 07/10/2020 entity stated that it has not received SCN. Vide letter dated 13/10/2020, SCN was forwarded to entity. Vide email dated 02/11/2020, entity sought adjournment. Reply filed by entity on 25/11/2020. Opportunity of personal hearing on 23/12/2020 granted vide email dated 25/11/2020. 23 Shri Pritesh H Gala Hearing notice dated 28/09/2020 could not be Did not appear for served through SPAD. Newspaper publication hearings or seek done on 24/10/2020 (for hearing on 03/11/2020) adjournment. and 14/12/2020 (for hearing on 23/12/2020) 24 Smt Jayvantiben D Hearing notice dated 28/09/2020 could not be Did not appear for Dedhia served through SPAD. Newspaper publication hearings or seek done on 24/10/2020 (for hearing on 03/11/2020) adjournment. and 14/12/2020 (for hearing on 23/12/2020) 25 Shri Bipin Bapu Hearing notice dated 28/09/2020 could not be November 03, 2020 Kamble served through SPAD. Newspaper publication done on 24/10/2020 (for hearing on 03/11/2020) and 14/12/2020 (for hearing on 23/12/2020) 26 Ms Anusaya Hearing notice dated 25/10/2020 served through November 03, 2020 Shankar Sawant SPAD.

Hearing concluded on 03/11/2020. 27 Shri Hearing notice dated 28/09/2020 served through Did not appear for Nagmaheshwar SPAD for 03/11/2020. Entity sought adjournment hearings or seek Balraj Yellamelli vide email dated 02/11/2020. Hearing notice sent adjournment. vide email dated 25/11/2020 for 23/12/2020. 28 M/s Nishottam Hearing notice dated 25/10/2020 for 03/11/2020 Did not appear for Traders Private could not be served through SPAD. Hearing hearings or seek Limited notice dated 03/12/2020 for 23/12/2020 could not adjournment. be delivered to an alternate address obtained from another matter. Intimation of hearing for 23/12/2020 sent via email as available on MCA website. Another opportunity of personal hearing granted on 01/02/2021 which was served through newspaper publication. 29 Shri Mahavirsingh Hearing notice dated 28/09/2020 served through Did not appear for N Chauhan SPAD for hearing on 03/11/2020 and hearing hearings or seek notice dated 02/12/2020 served through SPAD adjournment. for hearing on 23/12/2020 30 Smt Anita Hearing notice dated 28/09/2020 served through November 03, 2020 Rakeshkumar SPAD.

Confirmation received through Email. Ranka 31 M/s SKR Supreme Hearing notice dated 25/10/2020 could not be Did not appear for Electronics & served through SPAD. Newspaper publication hearings or seek Trading Private done on 14/12/2020 (for hearing on 23/12/2020) adjournment. Limited 32 M/s Coastal Hearing notice for 03/11/2020 could not be Noticee sought Fertilisers Limited delivered through SPAD. Newspaper publication adjournment for done for hearing on 23/12/2020. Vide email hearing on February dated 19/12/2020 replied stating that it has not 01, 2021. On next received SCN. Thereafter, SCN and Annexures date of hearing i.e. served vide letter dated 15/01/2021 through March 03, 2021, SPAD. A fresh opportunity of personal hearing Noticee neither granted on 01/02/2021. Noticee sought another appeared nor sought adjournment. Vide email dated 11/02/2021 adjournment. another opportunity of personal hearing granted on 03/03/2021. 33 M/s Venkateswara Hearing notice for 03/11/2020 undelivered Did not appear for Capital through SPAD. Newspaper publication done for hearings or seek Management hearing on 23/12/2020. adjournment.

Limited 34 M/s Godavari Hearing notice for 03/11/2020 delivered through Noticee sought Commercial SPAD. Hearing notice for 23/12/2020 delivered adjournment for Services Private through SPAD. Vide email dated 19/12/2020 hearing on February

Limited replied stating that it has not received SCN. SCN 01, 2021. On next and Annexures served vide letter dated date of hearing i.e. 15/01/2021 through SPAD. A fresh opportunity of March 03, 2021, personal hearing granted on 01/02/2021. Noticee Noticee neither sought another adjournment. Vide email dated appeared nor sought 11/02/2021 another opportunity of personal adjournment. hearing granted on 03/03/2021. 35 Shri Alpesh Hearing notice dated 28-09-2020 for 03/11/2020 Noticee sought Kanubhai Gohil delivered through SPAD. Hearing notice dated adjournment for 02/12/2020 for 23/12/2020 delivered through hearing on February SPAD. Vide letter dated 17/12/2020 the entity 01, 2021. On next has stated that he has not received the SCN in date of hearing i.e. this matter. SCN was served vide letter dated March 03, 2021, 15/01/2021 and a fresh opportunity of personal Noticee neither hearing granted on 01/02/2021. Noticee sought appeared nor sought another adjournment. Vide email dated adjournment. 11/02/2021 another opportunity of personal hearing granted on 03/03/2021. 36 M/s Sanmay Hearing Notice delivered. July 10, 2020 Trading Private Limited 37 M/s Acacio Entity earlier sought adjournment of hearing for Did not appear for Tradelink Private 26/08/2020 vide an email dated 25/08/2020. hearings or seek Limited Thereafter email dated 29/09/2020 sent for adjournment. hearing on 03/11/2020 could not be delivered through SPAD. Another email dated 25/11/2020 sent for hearing on 23/12/2020.

7. I note that Noticees no. 1 to 5, 7, 9, 10, 13, 20, 22, 25, 27, 29, 30, 32, 33 and 36 have filed their reply to the SCN, and in their separate replies, written submissions and oral submissions made at the time of personal hearing, have inter alia raised the following key contentions to the allegations in the SCN: a) At the outset, the Noticees have stated that the SCN suffers from great delay and latches. That the delay is not even explained which is against the principles of natural justice and has caused great prejudice to the Noticees. That the SCN is issued in the month of August 2017 and hence there is a delay of 5 years in issuance of SCN from the date of impugned transactions which delay has not even explained. b) The Noticees have submitted that multiple enforcement actions in sequence – one after the other SCN under section 11(1), 11(4) and 11B of the SEBI Act, 1992 and then Noticee under Rule 4 of the SEBI (Procedure for holding inquiry and imposing penalties by Adjudicating Officer) Rules 1995 in November 2017, have been initiated against the Noticees in this scrip which has caused great prejudice to the Noticees. c) The Noticees have submitted that it is specifically mentioned in the SCN that none of the entities including the Noticees have any connection with the company ACIL.

Further, no connection of any nature is established between the Noticees and the purported group entities. That the Noticees have been wrongly bunched, lumped and clubbed with the other entities. The Noticees submit that the connection should be reflected in the trading pattern, however it is not so in the present case. d) The Noticees have submitted that the SCN is ambiguous and misconceived and the allegations levied are absurd and too far-fetched as it lacks material particulars such as: (i) No benefit attributed to the Noticees by way of increase and decrease in price of the scrip. (ii) Whether and how the Noticees derived any benefit, gain or advantage from the alleged positive LTP contribution. (iii) Whether purported group entities derived any benefit from purported price rise or price fall. (iv) Whether and how much disproportionate gain is made by the Noticees. e) The Noticees further submitted that they have been charged for manipulating the price of the scrip as a buyer as well as a seller. The charges in the SCN are contradictory to each other and the Noticees can either be charged as a buyer or as a seller and not as both.

That the charges in the SCN are thus erroneous, illogical and unlawful. f) The Noticees further submitted that they have not received disproportionate gain or unfair advantage and have not caused any loss to an investor or group of investors. The Noticees state that they are not guilty of conduct which is contumacious or dishonest or acted in conscious disregard of law or that they acted in defiance of law.

8. On the merits of the case, I find that the investigation in the present matter has analyzed the trading in the scrip of ACIL in six Patches. Out of the six Patches, charges have been framed by the SCN with regards to the trading done by the Noticees during Patch-V and Patch-VI only. I note that no allegations have been levelled in the SCN with respect to Patches I to IV, for the following reasons:

a) Patch-I (November 23, 2007 – December 18, 2007): During the said patch, the scrip price increased from Rs. 21/- on November 23, 2007 to Rs. 74.35 on December 18, 2007, i.e. registering an increase of 254.40%. Upon analyzing the top 10 net LTP contributors as buyers, it was observed that the top 10 entities contributed 2.99% to market +LTP, which is insignificant. It was also observed that only 2 of the top ten entities were connected to each other. However, the combined +LTP contribution of these entities was 1.16% of the total market +LTP, which is insignificant. Hence, no adverse inference was drawn.

b) Patch-II (December 19, 2007 – December 18, 2008): During the said patch, the scrip price decreased from Rs. 75.55 on December 19, 2007 to Rs. 4.90 on December 18, 2008, i.e. registering a decrease of 93.07%. Upon analyzing the top 10 net LTP contributors as sellers, it was observed that the top 10 entities contributed 13.64% to market -LTP, which is insignificant. Further, no connection could be observed among the top ten entities. Hence, no adverse inference was drawn.

c) Patch-III (December 19, 2008 – June 28, 2010): During the said patch, the scrip price increased from Rs. 0.53 on December 19, 2008 to Rs. 0.72 on June 28, 2010, i.e. registering an increase of Rs. 0.19, which is insignificant. Hence, the said patch was not analyzed for LTP contribution.

d) Patch-IV (July 19, 2010 – December 26, 2011): During the said patch, the scrip price decreased from Rs. 7.25 on July 19, 2010 to Rs. 1.20 on December 26, 2011, i.e. registering a decrease of 83.44%. Upon analyzing the top 10 net LTP contributors as sellers, it was observed that the top 10 entities contributed 4.92% to market -LTP, which is insignificant. Further, no connection could be observed among the top ten entities. Hence, no adverse inference was drawn.

9. Whereas, I note that with regard to Patch-V and VI, during Patch-V, the scrip price increased from Rs. 1.26 on December 27, 2011 to Rs. 6.45 on May 04,

2012, i.e. registering an increase of 411.90%. I note that the top ten entities during Patch-V contributed 51.61% to market +LTP and there were 5 entities connected to one another among these top 10 entities. During Patch-VI, the scrip price decreased from Rs. 6.57 on May 05, 2012 to Rs. 1.30 on September 22, 2012, i.e. registering a decrease of 80.21%. I note that the top ten entities during Patch-VI contributed 25.75% to market -LTP and there were 6 entities connected to one another among these top 10 entities. In this regard, I note that during investigation 49 connected entities were identified for Patch V and VI based on the analysis of KYC details, off-market transfers, MCA documents and bank account statements. The list of 49 connected entities are as given below:

Table: 11 Noticee no. Noticee Name 1 Shri Jinesh Devendra Bhatt 2 Smt Pooja Jinesh Bhatt 3 Shri Deepak Pandurang Vikhape 4 Shri Krushnakumar Guruvachan Brahmbhatt 5 Smt Prarthana Tarunkumar Brahmbhatt 6 Smt Dipika Krushnakumar Brahmbhatt 7 M/s Kreative Finsol Private Limited 8 M/s Aristo Media And Entertainment Private Limited 9 Smt Naina Sanjeev Malhotra 10 Shri Sanjeev Ramesh Malhotra 11 Shri Ankit Doshi 12 M/s Ethan Constructions Private Limited 13 Shri Milan Hasmukhrai Deliwala 14 Shri Rajendrakumar Munna Prasad Gupta 15 M/s Jabeen Tradelink Private Limited 16 M/s Black Horse Media And Entertainment Private Limited 17 M/s Naseen Tradelink Private Limited 18 Shri Maheshchandra Chunilal Shah 19 Shri Dharmendra Rikhinchandra Shah HUF 20 M/s Narois Impex Private Limited 21 M/s Magan Mercantile Pvt Ltd 22 M/s Avance Technologies Limited 23 Shri Pritesh H Gala 24 Smt Jayvantiben D Dedhia 25 Shri Bipin Bapu Kamble 26 Ms Anusaya Shankar Sawant 27 Shri Nagmaheshwar Balraj Yellamelli 28 M/s Nishottam Traders Private Limited 29 Shri Mahavirsingh N Chauhan 30 Smt Anita Rakeshkumar Ranka

31 M/s SKR Supreme Electronics & Trading Private Limited 32 M/s Coastal Fertilisers Limited 33 M/s Venkateswara Capital Management Limited 34 M/s Godavari Commercial Services Private Limited 35 Shri Alpesh Kanubhai Gohil 36 M/s Sanmay Trading Private Limited 37 M/s Acacio Tradelink Private Limited 38 M/s Akansha Media and Entertainment Ltd 39 Smt. Jasmin S Bajoriya 40 M/s Whitetext Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. 41 M/s Yadon Constructions Pvt. Ltd. 42 M/s Adamina Traders Pvt. Ltd. 43 M/s Gajpal Buildinfra Pvt. Ltd. 44 Shri Saurabhkumar Rasiklal Gandhi 45 M/s Abijah Real Estate Pvt Ltd 46 Shri Champaklal Jethalai Shah 47 M/s Jainam Share Consultant Pvt. Ltd. 48 Ms Jasmeen Kumar Lodaya 49 M/s Alpeshkumar Kanubhai Gohil

10. I note that out of the above 49 connected entities, 21 entities by trading amongst themselves had contributed to market positive LTP during Patch-V and 39 entities by trading amongst themselves had contributed to market negative LTP during Patch-VI. Accordingly, SCN was issued to 37 entities out of the above 49 connected entities, who had traded amongst themselves during Patch-V and VI.

11. The allegations against these 37 entities, the Noticees, as contained in the SCN, with respect to trades amongst themselves during Patch-V and Patch-VI, are as follows:

(i) Noticees trade amongst themselves during Patch-V: It is alleged that 21 group entities trading amongst themselves during Patch-V, contributed to Rs. 6.84, which is 19.53% of the market positive LTP. Further, entities from Sl. no. 14 to 19 in the Table at para 9 of the SCN, have aided other connected entities i.e. entities from Sl. no. 1 to 13 of the said Table, by acting as sellers to increase the price of the scrip. In view of the above, the SCN alleges that the Noticees have violated Regulation 3(a), 3(b), 3(c), 3(d), 4(1), 4(2)(a) and 4(2)(e) of PFUTP Regulations.

(ii) Noticees trade amongst themselves during Patch-VI: It is alleged that 39 group entities trading amongst themselves during Patch-VI, contributed to Rs. -3.79, which is 11.48% of the market negative LTP. Further, entities from Sl. no. 24 to 29 in the Table at para 13 of the SCN, have aided other connected entities i.e. entities from Sl. no. 1 to 23 in the said Table, by acting as buyers to increase the price of the scrip. In view of the above, the SCN alleges that the Noticees have violated Regulation 3(a), 3(b), 3(c), 3(d), 4(1), 4(2)(a) and 4(2)(e) of PFUTP Regulations.

12. I have perused the allegations made in the SCN, the replies filed by the Noticees, the submissions made by the Noticees at the time of personal hearing and through their written submissions. After consideration of the same, my findings thereon are as under:

(i) I note that the Noticees have raised a preliminary common objection to the issuance of SCN in the present matter. It is the case of the said Noticees that the inordinate delay in the issuance of SCN in the present matter has prejudicially affected their rights to put forward an effective defense and thus has resulted in violation of the principles of natural justice. I note that investigation in the present matter was initiated by SEBI after receipt of a reference dated February 10, 2015, from the Principal Director of Income Tax (Investigation), Ahmedabad, forwarding statement recordings of various accommodation entry providers, their associates, dummy directors etc. alleging these entities through stock exchanges mechanism generated bogus Long Term Capital Gains Tax and ACIL was one of such scrips mentioned in the aforesaid reference. In order to carry out the investigation, the following activities were involved: 1) Examination of KYC documents etc. of the entities, 2) Examination of the trades of various entities, 3) collecting data from various sources such as exchanges, depositories, brokers, banks, etc. 4) Examination of funds flows amongst the various entities, 5) Many of the entities were not forthcoming to SEBI letters or taking time in responding, 6) The investigation involved six different patches, 7) Seeking responses from various delinquent entities, etc. and thereafter, various dots were connected to get the complete picture and thus, investigation was concluded in June 2017. Thus, investigation in the matter was intricate and time consuming since, it involved multitude of entities, precisely 49 Connected Entities including 37 Noticees.

After conclusion of investigation, SCN dated August, 2017 was issued and served upon the 37 Noticees in the matter. While in some cases, the SCN and its annexures were served upon the Noticees by way of registered posts, in case of the remaining Noticees, the SCN had to be served by way of substituted services. After completion of service of SCN, on November 18, 2019 the matter was placed before another Whole Time Member for hearing but it could not be proceeded further due to impending redistribution of cases amongst the Whole Time Members of SEBI. Thereafter, in January 13, 2020, the matter was reallocated and came to be assigned to the undersigned for granting of personal hearing and subsequent determination. The opportunity of personal hearing was granted to all the Noticees on April 03, 2020. However, the case could not be taken up for personal hearing on April 03, 2020 because of the strict nationwide lockdown measures. Hence, the hearing was further adjourned to July 10, 2020. This time an option of hearing through audio-video conference was also provided. I note that personal hearing was granted to the Noticees on multiple occasions i.e. July 10, 2020, August 26, 2020, November 03, 2020, December 23, 2020, February 01, 2021, and March 03, 2021, on the request made by the Noticees on the ground that impending restrictions during lockdown were making it difficult to co-ordinate with their advocates and finalizing their reply to the SCN.

The details of the service of notice of hearing on multiple dates to all the Noticees are given in para 6 above. Further, I note that Noticee no. 32, 34 and 35 vide their respective letters in December 2020, received by SEBI on December 23, 2020, had submitted that they have not received the SCN and requested a copy of the same. Accordingly, SCN had to be served to these Noticees and hearing was granted to Noticees no. 32, 34 and 35 on March 03, 2021 and I note that none of the Noticees appeared for the hearing on March 03, 2021 or sought adjournment for the same. I also note that Noticees no. 1, 2, 3 and 27 had filed their respective written submissions in February 2021. In view of the above, I note that, the time taken for completion of collective investigation into such a large number of entities, the time taken for issuing SCNs and conducting personal hearing for such a large number of Noticees cannot be termed as unreasonable delay, in the peculiar facts of the present case. Notwithstanding the same, I also note that there is no provision in the SEBI Act, 1992 which may have the effect of prohibiting SEBI from taking action beyond a particular period of time in a given case.

In Ravi Mohan & Ors. v. SEBI and other connected appeals decided on August 08, 2013, Hon’ble Securities Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai (hereinafter referred to as ‘Hon’ble SAT’) while referring to its own decision in HB Stockholdings Ltd. v. SEBI (Appeal no. 114 of 2012) decided on August 27, 2013 and decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in Collector of Central Excise, New Delhi v. Bhagsons Paint Industry (India) reported in 2003 (158) ELT 129 (S.C.), observed as under:

“....Based on decision of this Tribunal in case of HB Stockholdings Ltd. vs. SEBI (Appeal no. 114 of 2012 decided on 27.08.2013) it is contended on behalf of the appellants that in view of the delay of more than 8 years in issuing the show cause notice, the impugned order is liable to be quashed and set aside. There is no merit in this contention, because, this Tribunal while setting aside the decision of SEBI on merits has clearly held in para 20 of the order, that delay itself may not be fatal in each and every case. Moreover, the Apex Court in case of Collector of Central Excise, New Delhi vs. Bhagsons Paint Industry (India) reported in 2003 (158) ELT 129 (S.C) has held that if there no statutory bar for adjudicating the matter beyond a particular date, the Tribunal cannot set aside the adjudication order merely on the ground that the adjudication order is passed after a lapse of several years from the date of issuing notice....”

(ii) I note that the Noticees have also raised the contention that multiple enforcement actions have been initiated against them. That they have received SCN under Section 11(1), 11(4) and 11B of SEBI Act, 1992 and also SCN under Rule 4 of SEBI (Procedure for holding inquiry and imposing penalties by Adjudicating Officer) Rules, 1995, which is unreasonable and disproportionate and caused great prejudice to the Noticees. In this regard, I note that the Adjudicating proceedings initiated vide show cause notice dated November 2017, although emanating from the same set of facts, have been initiated inter alia under the provisions of Chapter VIA of the SEBI Act. The SEBI Act enables the Board to initiate parallel proceedings on the same set of facts against a person under Sections 11 and 11B or under Section 11D, as the case may be, on the one hand and adjudication proceedings under Chapter VIA for the imposition of monetary penalties on the other hand. In this regard, reference can be made to the Order of the Hon’ble SAT in the matter of Dipak J. Panchal vs. SEBI, Appeal No. 198 of 2011 (Order dated November 12, 2012), wherein, it was held that: “There is no bar under the Act in taking all the three actions (under Chapter IV, Chapter VIA and Section 24 of the SEBI Act) simultaneously or taking only one of the actions as the Board may deem fit…” In view of the aforesaid, I find the contention raised by Noticees is untenable.

(iii) As observed in para 3(v) above that investigation was initiated against 49 entities. However, SCN was issued with respect to 37 entities. As mentioned in para 8 above, no adverse inference was drawn in the SCN against entities who had traded in Patch I to IV. However, with regard to Patch V and VI, it was observed that among the top 10 entities that contributed to the market positive LTP in Patch-V, 5 entities were connected to each other and among the top 10 entities that contributed to market negative LTP in Patch-VI, 6 entities were connected to each other. Therefore, I note that in Patch-V and Patch-VI, there are significant number of connected entities among the top 10 contributors.

(iv) SCN alleges that 21 group entities by trading amongst themselves during Patch-V, contributed to Rs. 6.84, which is 19.53% of the market positive LTP. Further, entities from Sl. no. 14 to 19 in the Table at para 9 of the SCN, have aided other connected entities i.e. entities from Sl. no. 1 to 13 of the said Table, by acting as sellers to increase the price of the scrip. The said Table at para 9 of the SCN is reproduced below:

Table: 12 +LTP trades as buyer with group +LTP trades as seller with group +LTP entities entities as S. buyer No. Entity Name +LTP No. of % of +LTP No. of % of & (in `) trades Qty mkt (in `) trades Qty mkt seller +LTP +LTP (in `) 1 Dharmendra Rikhinchandra 1.55 42 7, 2 6 4 4.42 3.65 67 36,781 10.41 5.2

Shah Aristo Media and 32 83,116 2.11 2 Entertainment Private 1.28 58 96,743 3.65 0.74 2.02 Limited Nagmaheshwar Balraj 0 0 0 0 3 0.95 38 18,184 2.71 Yellamelli 0.95 4 Mahavirsingh N Chauhan 0.85 7 25 2.43 0 0 0 0 0.85 5 Sanjeev Ramesh Malhotra 0.65 23 362,287 1.86 0.10 6 67,125 0.29 0.75 Naseen Tradelink Private 0 0 0 0 6 0.45 5 1 4 0 1.28 Limited 0.45 Ethan Constructions Private 0.64 33 89,491 1.82 7 0.43 16 29,445 1.23 Limited 1.07 8 Jinesh Devendra Bhatt 0.33 8 5 8, 5 8 2 0.94 0.13 6 45,212 0.37 0.46 9 Pooja Jinesh Bhatt 0.2 7 3 2, 8 0 6 0. 5 7 0.07 2 351 0.20 0.27 Dipika Krushnakumar 0.18 13 82,453 0.51 10 0.11 3 3,855 0.31 Brahmbhatt 0.29 Krushnakumar Guruvachan 0.54 32 39,768 1.54 11 0.02 2 43,100 0.06 Brahmbhatt 0.56 12 Deepak Pandurang Vikhape 0.01 1 100 0.03 0 0 0 0 0.01 Rajendrakumar Munna 0 0 0 0 13 0.01 1 40,000 0.03 Prasad Gupta 0.01 Alpeshkumar Kanubhai 0 0 0 0 0.01 1 1,669 0.03 14 Gohil 0.01 Sanmay Trading Private 0 0 0 0 0.38 10 233,18 1.08 15 Limited 0 0.38 Maheshchandra Chunilal 0 0 0 0 0.22 2 20 0.63 16 Shah 0.22 17 Anusaya Shankar Sawant 0 0 0 0 0.16 5 1,806 0.46 0.16 18 Bipin Bapu Kamble 0 0 0 0 0.01 1 1,559 0.03 0.01 Jabeen Tradelink Private 0 0 0 0 0.01 1 10,000 0.03 19 Limited 0.01 Group Total 6.84 211 692,531 19.53 6.84 211 692,53 19.53 - 1 (v) With regard to the allegation that 19 connected Noticees manipulated the price of the scrip of ACIL in Patch-V by contributing to price rise of Rs. 6.84 which is 19.53% of the market positive LTP by trading amongst themselves, I note that, in the facts of the present case, 19.53% contribution to market positive LTP is a significant amount for the trades by a group of 19 entities in the scrip of the company ACIL, which registered meagre profits of only Rs. 0.09 Cr, Rs. 0.43 Cr and Rs. 0.75 Cr for the financial years 2010, 2011 and 2012, and was also thinly traded.

However, from the above Table, I note that out of the 19 connected entities, except for entities at Sl. No. 1, 2 and 7, the individual positive LTP contribution of the other entities to market positive LTP, as buyer and seller with group entities during Patch-V, is less than 1%. Therefore, in the facts and circumstances of the present case, I find that except for entities at Sl. No. 1, 2 and 7 in the above Table, the individual contribution of other entities to the market positive LTP is not so significant to invite the rigors of regulatory direction under section 11B of SEBI Act, 1992. In this regard, I note that during Patch-V, Dharmendra Rikhinchandra Shah (Noticee no. 19) has contributed to price rise of Rs. 1.55 as a buyer and Rs. 3.65 as a seller, i.e. positive LTP contribution as buyer and seller of Rs. 5.2, Aristo Media and Entertainment Pvt. Ltd. (Noticee no. 8) has contributed to price rise of Rs. 1.28 as a buyer and Rs. 0.72 as a seller, i.e. positive LTP contribution as buyer and seller of Rs. 2.02, and Ethan Constructions Pvt. Ltd. (Noticee no. 12) has contributed to price rise of Rs. 0.43 as a buyer and Rs. 0.64 as a seller, i.e. positive LTP contribution as buyer and seller of Rs. 1.07.

Hence, I find that entities at Sl. No. 1, 2 and 7 i.e. Dharmendra Rikhinchandra Shah (Noticee no. 19), Aristo Media and Entertainment Pvt. Ltd. (Noticee no. 8) and Ethan Constructions Pvt. Ltd. (Noticee no. 12), have significantly contributed to market positive LTP during Patch-V by trading amongst connected entities.

(vi) It is also alleged that 39 group entities, as given in the Table at para 13 of the SCN, traded amongst themselves during Patch-VI and contributed to Rs. - 3.79, which is 11.48% of the market negative LTP. Further, entities from Sl. no. 24 to 28 in the Table at para 13 of the SCN, have aided other connected entities i.e. entities from Sl. no. 1 to 23 in the said Table, by acting as buyers to decrease the price of the scrip. The said Table at para 13 of the SCN is reproduced below:

Table: 13 -LTP trades as seller with group -LTP trades as buyer with group -LTP entities entities as S. buyer No. Entity Name -LTP No. of % of -LTP No. of % of & (in `) trade Qty mkt - (in `) trades Qty mkt - seller s LTP LTP (in `) 1 Nishottam Traders -0.92 47 245,280 - 2. 8 0 - 0. 3 7 11 1,270 1. 1 3 Private Limited -1.29 2 Dharmendra -0.64 7 1,502 - 1. 9 5 - 0. 0 5 1 5 0. 1 5 Rikhinchandra Shah -0.69 3 Anita Rakeshkumar -0.46 17 39,248 - 1. 4 0 - 0. 3 8 10 56,343 1.16 Ranka -0.84 4 Aristo Media And Entertainment Private -0.34 13 10,855 - 1. 0 4 - 0. 6 5 37 1.98 63,268 Limited -0.99

5 Nagmaheshwar Balraj -0.24 16 10,700 - 0. 7 3 0 0 0 0 Yellamelli -0.24 6 Venkateswara Capital -0.21 21 480,985 - 0. 6 4 - 0. 0 6 5 675,000 0. 1 8 Management Ltd -0.27 7 Sanjeev Ramesh Malhotra -0.19 10 1,282 -0.58 -0.16 14 40,321 0. 4 9 - 0 .35 8 Godavari Commercial -0.11 8 1,549,994 - 0. 3 3 0 0 0 0 Services Private Limited -0.11 9 Prarthana Tarunkumar -0.1 6 7,194 - 0. 3 0 0 0 0 0 Brahmbhatt -0.1 10 Rajendrakumar Munna -0.09 7 13,281 - 0. 2 7 0 0 0 0 Prasad Gupta -0.09 11 Alpeshkumar Kanubhai -0.07 2 4,098 - 0. 2 1 - 0 .1 2 50,015 0.30 Gohil -0.17 12 Pritesh H Gala -0.06 6 1,875 - 0. 1 8 0 0 0 0 -0.06 13 Jayvantiben D Dedhia -0.06 5 1,725 - 0. 1 8 0 0 0 0 -0.06 14 Dipika Krushnakumar -0.06 6 16,590 - 0. 1 8 - 0. 0 3 3 56,000 0. 0 9 Brahmbhatt -0.09 15 Naina Sanjeev Malhotra -0.04 4 54,000 - 0. 1 2 - 0. 4 3 32 96,436 1. 3 1 - 0. 4 7 16 Ankit Doshi -0.04 4 1,250 - 0. 1 2 0 0 0 0 -0.04 17 SKR Supreme Electronics -0.04 4 3,550 - 0. 1 2 - 0. 1 3 5 6,050 0. 4 0 & Trading Private Limited -0.17 18 Black Horse Media and Entertainment Private -0.04 4 7,848 - 0. 1 2 0 0 0 0 Limited -0.04 19 Acacio Tradelink Private -0.02 2 65,000 - 0. 0 6 0 0 0 0 Limited -0.02 20 Narois Impex Private -0.02 2 450 - 0. 0 6 - 0. 0 3 2 2,570 0. 0 9 Limited -0.05 21 Naseen Tradelink Private -0.02 1 449 - 0. 0 6 - 0. 7 7 13 32,505 2. 3 4 Limited -0.79 22 Milan Hasmukhrai -0.01 1 5,008 - 0. 0 3 0 0 0 0 Deliwala -0.01 23 Avance Technologies -0.01 1 100 - 0. 0 3 0 0 0 0 Limited -0.01 24 Coastal Fertilisers 0 0 0 0 -0.26 24 1,355,979 0. 7 9 Limited -0.26 25 Ethan Constructions 0 0 0 0 -0.12 11 12,450 0. 3 7 Private Limited -0.12 26 Jinesh Devendra Bhatt 0 0 0 0 -0.19 19 4,005 0. 5 8 - 0. 1 9 27 KREATIVE FINSOL 0 0 0 0 -0.02 1 449 0. 0 6 PRIVATE LIMITED -0.02 28 Magan Mercantile Pvt Ltd 0 0 0 0 -0.02 2 65,000 0. 0 6 - 0. 0 2 Group Total -3.77 192 2,517,666 11.48 -3.77 192 2,517,666 11.48 (vii) With regard to the above allegation that 28 Noticees manipulated the price of the scrip of ACIL in Patch-VI by contributing to price fall of Rs. -3.79 which is 11.48% of the market negative LTP by trading amongst themselves, I note that, in the facts of the present case, 11.48% contribution to market negative LTP cannot be called significant for the trades by a group of 28 entities for a period of 5 months i.e. May 05, 2012 – September 22, 2012 (Patch-VI).

(viii) From the above, I find that Noticee no. 8, 12 and 19 have significantly contributed to the market positive LTP during Patch-V. I note that the allegation against the Noticees in the SCN is based on the Noticees acting as a group and trading among themselves during Patch-V. In this regard, the basis of connection amongst Noticees no. 8, 12 and 19 with other connected group entities, as alleged in the SCN, is reproduced below:

Table: 14 Noticee Name of the Basis of Connection No. Noticee  Off-market transfer with Noticee no. 10 on 17/04/2012  Off-market transfer with Noticee no. 25 on 28/03/2012  Off-market transfer with Noticee no. 26 on 29/03/2012  Off-market transfer with Noticee no. 23 on 26/05/2012  Off-market transfer with Noticee no. 24 on 26/05/2012 M/s Aristo Media  Off-market transfer with Shri Saurabhkumar Rasiklal and 8 Gandhi (one of the 49 connected group entities) on Entertainment 26/05/2012 Private Ltd.  Common directors, viz Shri Krishan Kumar Dhiman & Shri Amar Mahavirsingh Panghal, with Noticee no.  Off-market transfer with Smt. Jasmin S Bajoriya on 10/01/2012  Off-market transfer with Noticee no. 35 on 26/10/2012  Off-market transfer with Noticee no. 27 on 02/03/2012 M/s Ethan  Common director viz Shri Shyam Shankar Kadam with 12 Constructions Yadon Constructions Pvt. Ltd. (one of the 49 connected Private Limited group entities). Shri Dharmendra  Off-market transfer with Jhaveri Trading and Investment 19 Rikhinchandra Pvt. Ltd. (one of the 49 connected group entities) on Shah HUF 12/09/2011 (ix) From the above table, I note that Noticees no. 8, 12 and 19 were connected to multiple entities within the group who had traded amongst themselves and have traded among the group entities and significantly contributed to the market positive LTP during Patch-V.

(x) With regard to the allegations in the SCN, I note that Noticee no. 19 has sent an email dated November 10, 2020, wherein, he has only submitted that he had placed an After Market Order (AMO) before the opening time of market and then got indulged in his routine business activities so he could not look into it back again and that he does not have any relations with ACIL. I note that the submission made by Noticee no. 19 is evasive without giving any concrete explanation for his trades with other group entities during Patch-V and no explanation on his connection with the group entities, as alleged in the SCN. I find that he is simply pleading ignorance of his trades in the matter and therefore, I find the aforesaid submission of Noticee no. 19 is untenable.

(xi) I note that Noticees no. 8 and 12 have not filed any reply to the SCN. Further, I note that multiple opportunities of personal hearing was granted to these Noticees, as mentioned in para 6 above. However, Noticees no. 8 and 12 did not appear or seek any adjournment with regard to the opportunity of personal hearing granted to them.

(xii) In view of the findings in the aforesaid paras, I find that Dharmendra Rikhinchandra Shah (Noticee no. 19), Aristo Media and Entertainment Pvt. Ltd. (Noticee no. 8) and Ethan Constructions Pvt. Ltd. (Noticee no. 12) have significantly contributed to market positive LTP during Patch-V.

13. In view of the above, I find that Noticees no. 8, 12 and 19 have violated Regulation 3(a), 3(c), 4(1), 4(2)(a) and 4(2)(e) of PFUTP Regulations, 2003, as alleged in the SCN.

14. I note that, as discussed in para 12(v) above, that except for Noticees no. 8, 12 and 19, the individual contribution of the other 16 Noticees (which is less than 1%) to the market positive LTP in Patch-V, is not so significant to invite the rigors of regulatory direction under section 11B of SEBI Act, 1992. Further, I also note that Adjudication proceedings have been initiated and are pending against all the Noticees. Further, as discussed in para 12(vii) above, I find that the allegation that 28 Noticees by trading amongst themselves during Patch-VI and contributing to price fall of Rs. -3.79 which is 11.48% of the market negative LTP, does not call for issuance of regulatory directions under section 11B of SEBI Act, 1992, in the facts and circumstances of this case.

Directions: 15. In view of the aforesaid, I, in exercise of powers conferred upon me under section 11 (4) and 11B, read with section 19 of the SEBI Act, 1992, hereby pass the following directions:

i. Noticees no. 8, 12 and 19 are restrained from accessing the securities market and further prohibited from buying, selling or otherwise dealing in securities, directly or indirectly, or being associated with the securities market in any manner, whatsoever, for a period of three (3) months, from the date of this order;

ii. Proceedings against Noticees no. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36 and 37, are disposed of without any directions.

16. This order comes into force with immediate effect. The obligation of the Noticees debarred in the present Order, in respect of settlement of securities, if any, purchased or sold in the cash segment of the recognized stock exchange(s), as existing on the date of this Order, can take place irrespective of the restraint/ prohibition imposed by this Order, only in respect of pending unsettled transactions, if any. Further, all open positions, if any, of the Noticees debarred in the present Order, in the F&O segment of the stock exchanges, are permitted to be squared off, irrespective of the restraint/ prohibition imposed by this Order.

17. A copy of this Order shall be served on the Noticees, recognized Stock Exchanges, Depositories, Registrar and Share Transfer Agents of Mutual Funds to ensure compliance with the above directions.

Sd/- Place: Mumbai ANANTA BARUA Date: August 27, 2021 WHOLE TIME MEMBER SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA