AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Date,Buy Quantity,Buy Value,Sell Quantity,Sell Value
22.06.2012,"1,000","6,84,000","1,000","6,87,000
25.06.2012,"1,000","7,11,000","1,000","7,12,747
26.06.2012,"1,000","7,20,000","1,000","7,31,342
28.06.2012,"1,000","7,20,000","1,000","7,26,000
29.06.2012,"1,000","7,32,997","1,000","7,36,987
Total (June),"5,000","35,67,997","5,000","35,94,076
02.07.2012,"1,000","7,45,000","1,000","7,55,020
03.07.2012,"2,000","15,29,994","2,000","15,35,673
05.07.2012,"1,000","7,56,000","1,000","7,48,650
06.07.2012,"1,000","7,51,596","1,000","7,43,900
09.07.2012,"1,000","7,52,941","1,000","7,45,900
11.07.2012,"1,000","7,77,000","1,000","7,74,776
Total (July),"7,000","53,12,531","7,000","53,03,919
Grand Total (June +
July)","12,000","88,80,528","12,000","88,97,995
detailed by the appellant. The appellant had a long career of 28 years prior to the violation. He had undergone multiple angioplasties. He explained that,,,,
due to a communication gap between him and the broker the violation had occurred which resulted into a meager profit of Rs.17,467/ . Taking into",,,,
consideration these factors in our opinion a penalty of Rs. 2 lakhs instead of Rs.12 lakhs as imposed by the Adjudicating Officer would be just and,,,,
sufficient.,,,,
For the reasons stated aforesaid, the appeal is partly allowed. The impugned order is affirmed except the penalty which is reduced from Rs.12 lakh",,,,
to Rs.2 lakh which shall be paid within four weeks from today by the appellant to respondent SEBI.,,,,