Skip to main content

Wilful defaulters to face curbs on fund mop-up from capital market

To sternly deal with wilful defaulters, Sebi today decided to impose restrictions on such entities with respect to raising funds from capital markets.

Such measures are expected to further enhance the protection of investors in the securities market.

As part of new norms, the watchdog will impose restrictions on companies, promoters, and directors that are categorised as a 'wilful defaulter' from accessing the capital markets.

"The Board approved the proposal to review the policy in respect of restricting an issuer company/its promoter/ directors, categorized as wilful defaulter, from raising capital after going through the public consultation process," Sebi said in statement after the board meeting.

At present, Sebi norms bar wilful defaulters from issuing convertible debt instruments. However, there is no restriction on such entities from raising funds from the capital market by way of public or rights issues, among others

Before finalising stricter regulations to deal with wilful defaulters, Sebi is expected to gather views from various stakeholders. The matter would also be discussed in the Primary Market Advisory Committee (PMAC).

The approval comes at a time when the amount of bad loans is on the rise in the banking system, mainly due to higher number of wilful defaulters.

To tighten the regulatory noose around wilful defaulters, the Reserve Bank has suggested to Sebi that such entities should be prevented from raising funds through capital markets.

Meanwhile, the government is planning to come out with a separate Bill in Parliament to deal with instances of wilful defaults in payment of bank loans.

Stringent action against the wilful defaulters in terms of attachment of properties under Sarfaesi Act (Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act), change in management and other legal action against the promoters, among others, are under consideration.

 Article referred: http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2014-11-19/news/56265873_1_wilful-defaulters-regulatory-noose-sarfaesi-act

Comments

Post a Comment

Most viewed this month

Appellate authorities under Special Statutes cannot be asked to condone delay

Madras High Court in R.Gowrishankar vs. The Commissioner of Service Tax has held that Appellate authorities cannot be asked to condone the delay, beyond the extended period of limitation A Division Bench comprising of Justices S. Manikumar and D. Krishnakumar, made this observation while considering an appeal filed against Single Bench order declining to set aside the order made in the condone delay petition filed by the petitioner to condone 223 days in filing the appeal before the Commissioner of Service Tax (Appeals). Article referred: http://www.livelaw.in/appellate-authorities-special-statutes-cannot-asked-condone-delay-beyond-extended-period-limitation-madras-hc/
Post a Comment
Read more

'Seize assets to pay damages to accident victim'

Her story might be an inspiration for the physically challenged but justice has remained elusive for her. In 2008, a bus accident left research engineer S Thenmozhi, 30, paraplegic. In April 2013, the motor accident claims tribunal directed the Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (TNSTC) to provide her a compensation of 57.9 lakh. However, TNSTC refused to budge and on Tuesday a city court ordered attaching of movable assets of the transport corporation. Thenmozhi was employed in C-DOT, a telecom technology development centre in Bangalore. On July 21, 2008, she was coming to Chennai in a private bus. Around 2am, the bus had a flat tyre and the driver parked it on the left side of the road near Pallikonda in Vellore district on the Bangalore-Chennai highway. While the tyre was being changed, a TNSTC bus of Dharmapuri division hit the stationary bus. The rear part of the bus was smashed and passengers were injured. Thenmozhi who had a seat at the back of the bus suffered...
Post a Comment
Read more

Mumbai ITAT rules income of offshore discretionary trust is subject to tax in India

The Mumbai Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has recently determined the following issue in the affirmative in the case of Manoj Dhupelia: Should the income of an offshore discretionary trust be subject to tax in India, if no distributions have been made to beneficiaries in India? The question arose from appeals filed by individual beneficiaries in relation to a Lichtenstein-based trust, the Ambrunova Trust and Merlyn Management SA (the Trust) with the ITAT. It is important to note that the individuals in this case were amongst those first identified by the Government of India (GOI) as holding undeclared bank accounts in Lichtenstein. The ITAT ruling raises the following issues: Taxation of Trust Corpus: ITAT classified the corpus of the trust as "undisclosed income" and declared it taxable in the hands of the beneficiaries. Taxation of Undistributed Income: ITAT refused to draw a distinction between the corpus and undistributed income from the trust and declared i...
Post a Comment
Read more