Best printers for Home

Best Mixer Grinder

Best wired Earphones

Best 43 Inch TV in India

Best Wi Fi Routers

Best Home Theatre in India

Smart Watch under 5000

Best Laptops for Education

Best Laptop for Students

New Delhi: Markets regulator <keyword id="19901201" type="General" weightage="100" keywordseo="Sebi" source="keywords">Sebi</keyword> has proposed allowing Real Estate Investment Trusts (<keyword id="20186402" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="REITs" source="keywords">REITs</keyword>), Small and Medium REITs (SM REITs) and Infrastructure Investment Trusts (<keyword id="20186403" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="InvITs" source="keywords">InvITs</keyword>) to use <keyword id="21737868" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="interest-rate-derivatives" source="keywords">interest rate derivatives</keyword> for <keyword id="23778373" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="hedging-risk" source="keywords">hedging risk</keyword>. Also, the regulator has suggested approving locked-in units for REITs and InvITs to be transferred among sponsors and their groups, similar to rules for promoters in listed companies, to help sponsors manage their holdings without compromising "skin in the game". Additionally, Sebi has suggested permitting fixed deposits to be considered as cash equivalents when calculating leverage for REITs and InvITs, clarifying credit rating requirements for REIT and InvIT borrowings, and setting a timeline for filling vacancies on their boards and expanding the asset base for REITs and SM REITs. The regulator has also proposed to permit REITs to invest in liquid mutual funds. It has suggested measures to facilitate ease of doing business for REITs and InvITs, along with investors' protection. According to its consultation paper, Sebi is considering allowing REITs and InvITs to hedge against interest rate fluctuations by using derivatives like interest rate swaps. This could help stabilise cash flows, reduce risks, and protect unitholder interests, especially for long-term infrastructure projects. It is also proposed to define "Common Infrastructure" for REIT regulations. To enhance business flexibility for REITs, it has been proposed to clarify that facilities like power plants, heating/cooling systems, water treatment, and waste treatment plants -- serving one or more REIT assets -- will qualify as "common infrastructure" under REIT rules. This applies even if these facilities are not located within a single project due to their technical requirements. These facilities should supply and be used exclusively by REIT assets. For power plants, however, any excess power can be sold to the state utility/grid as per regulations, with any credits or payments going towards the benefit of REIT assets. To improve transparency, it has been proposed to amend the governance norms for quarterly reporting of InvITs. Currently, quarterly results for the investment manager and its business segments are presented to the investment manager's board, but there is no direct requirement for InvITs to report their performance. The proposed amendment would clarify that quarterly results should specifically reflect the performance of the InvITs themselves, not just the investment managers. This change aligns InvIT regulations with REIT regulations, where the focus is on the quarterly results of the REIT itself. Also, it has been suggested to align the composition of NRCs in REIT and InvIT managers with listed companies under the LODR regulations. Currently, all NRC members for REITs and InvITs must be independent directors. The proposal allows a mix of independent and non-executive directors, similar to listed companies. To enhance investors' protection, Sebi has suggested reviewing conditions for InvITs to borrow beyond the 49 per cent limit, assessing REIT investments in unlisted equity shares and outlining the roles and responsibilities of trustees for REITs, InvITs, and SM REITs. In a separate consultation paper, the regulator has proposed a regulatory framework for "restricted return InvITs" to provide infrastructure investors with predictable returns by setting limits on both upside gains and downside protection. The proposed framework for restricted return InvITs is designed to provide investors with structured returns, capped at both minimum and maximum levels to offer stability. Restricted return InvITs would include downside protection -- a minimum assured return -- and/or an upside restriction, a cap on returns -- depending on the arrangement. These investments would be limited to sophisticated investors who meet high minimum investment thresholds, with each unit priced at a minimum of Rs 500 crore and total InvIT assets of at least Rs 50,000 crore. Investors would be required to sign a waiver and undertaking form, acknowledging their understanding of the structured returns and risks involved, including the transfer of any excess returns to the sponsors. This waiver should be submitted before purchase in both primary and secondary markets, with compliance overseen by merchant bankers or brokers. The Securities and Exchange Board of India (Sebi) has sought public comments on both consultation papers by November 13.

Sebi proposes to allow InvITs, REITs, SM REITs to use interest rate derivatives for hedging risk

New Delhi: Markets regulator <keyword id="19901201" type="General" weightage="100" keywordseo="Sebi" source="keywords">Sebi</keyword> has debarred 14 entities including, <keyword id="22941399" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="Rana-Sugars" source="keywords">Rana Sugars</keyword> promoters' and other related entities from the securities markets for two years and slapped a Rs 63-crore fine on them on charges of diversion of funds. The regulator also prohibited Inder Pratap Singh Rana (promoter), Ranjit Singh Rana (Chairman), Veer Pratap Singh Rana (MD), Gurjeet Singh Rana, Karan Pratap Singh Rana, Rajbans Kaur, Preet Inder Singh Rana and <keyword id="22946824" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="sukhjinder-kaur" source="keywords">Sukhjinder Kaur</keyword> (promoter) from holding any position as director or key managerial person of any other listed company for two years. Ranjit Singh, Veer Pratap and Sukhjinder Kaur were also the promoters of <keyword id="22946823" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="Rana-Sugars-Ltd" source="keywords" meta.keywordsubtype="org" meta.entityname="Rana Sugars Ltd" meta.hostid="345" meta.entityid="Rana Sugars Ltd">Rana Sugars Ltd</keyword>, as per the exchange data. Individually, Sebi imposed penalties in the range of Rs 3 crore to 7 crore on Rana Sugars, its promoters, and other related entities. "I find that noticee No 1 to 9, who are promoters of RSL and beneficiaries of such diversion of funds from RSL, have violated PFUTP (Prohibition of Fraudulent and Unfair Trade Practices) regulations. "...also find that Noticee No 10 (Manoj Gupta), who was CFO and signed and certified such manipulated financial statements of RSL, aided and abetted such diversion of funds from RSL to its promoters and their family members violated PFUTP regulations," Sebi's Chief General Manager G Ramar said in the final order on Tuesday. The probe revealed that Rana Sugars Ltd failed to disclose <keyword id="22946822" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="Laxmiji-Sugars-Mills-Company" source="keywords">Laxmiji Sugars Mills Company</keyword> as a related party in FY 2016-17. Further, the firm failed to disclose FTPL, CAPL, JABPL, RJPL and RGSPL as related parties. Inder Pratap, Ranjit, Veer Pratap Singh Rana, were persons in charge of and responsible for the affairs of Rana Sugars. Therefore, Rana Sugars, Inder Pratap, Ranjit Singh and Veer Pratap Singh Rana have violated the disclosure rules. Sebi also noted with respect to the movement of funds between RSL, and its related entities was not towards business advance for the purchase of sugar cane seeds and repayment of unsecured loan. Related parties are Flawless Traders Pvt Ltd (FTPL), Century Agros Pvt Ltd (CAPL), Jay Aar Builders Pvt Ltd (JABPL), RJ Texfab Pvt Ltd (RJPL) and RGS Traders (RGSPL). These funds were then transferred by RSL to related parties on the same day to promoters of Rana Sugars and their family members. The regulator found that related parties aided and abetted Rana Sugars, its promoters and directors to divert funds from RSL and violated PFUTP norms, the order said. Sebi also directed Rana Sugars to recover Rs 607 crore from related entities which includes Rs 339 crore in receivables and Rs 268 crore in interest dues. Thereafter, the regulator directed Rana Sugars to take all necessary steps for recovery of dues from these entities and advised them to appoint an independent law firm to take effective steps for recovery in consultation with the NSE. The markets watchdog also observed that RSL, Inder Pratap Singh Rana, Ranjit Singh, Veer Pratap Singh, Gurjeet Singh, Karan Pratap Singh and Rajbans Kaur have failed to provide any explanation for not appearing before the investigation authority (IA). Further, they also failed to furnish information/documents sought by the IA, which hampered the investigation process, thereby, violating Sebi norms. The order came after Sebi investigated the affairs of RSL to examine the diversion of funds from the company by the promoters and promoter-related entities of Rana Sugars, and consequent misstatements in the financial statements of the company. And whether the alleged diverted funds have been siphoned off by the promoters and promoter-related entities of the firm, resulting in violations of the provisions of PFUTP rules and LODR (Listing Obligations and Disclosure Requirements) norms. The investigation period was from financial year (FY) 2014-15 to FY 2020-21.

Sebi bans Rana Sugars' promoters from securities market for 2 years, imposes Rs 63 crore fine

Markets regulator <keyword id="19901201" type="General" weightage="100" keywordseo="Sebi" source="keywords" meta.keywordsubtype="org" meta.entityname="Sebi" meta.hostid="153" meta.entityid="Sebi">SEBI</keyword> has asked the <keyword id="20677983" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="mutual-fund-industry" source="keywords">mutual fund industry</keyword> to proactively conduct stress tests, a key component of <keyword id="20383727" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="risk-management" source="keywords">risk management</keyword> for the financial sector, which will help strengthen the ecosystem, its whole-time member Ananth Narayan Gopalakrishnan said on Friday. The regulator's stress testing emphasizes the need to assess and manage liquidity risks, especially in small and midcap equity schemes. Speaking at a mutual fund event, Gopalakrishnan highlighted the importance of modelling stress scenarios not just for individual schemes or fund houses, but for the entire mutual fund ecosystem. "It is also important to model stress scenarios for the entire composite mutual fund ecosystem. I would strongly encourage the industry and <keyword id="20090036" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="AMFI" source="keywords" meta.keywordsubtype="org" meta.entityname="AMFI" meta.hostid="153" meta.entityid="AMFI">AMFI</keyword> to take the lead and proactively conduct objective and credible industry wide stress tests. themselves," Gopalakrishnan said. He also emphasized the need to find better ways to communicate the risks associated with different mutual fund schemes. The SEBI official mentioned that while the current risk measurement system is straightforward and has had a significant impact, it doesn't fully capture the differences in risks among various investment schemes. According to him, many schemes are just labelled as high risk, even though they have different kinds of risks. The goal is to improve this system to better reflect those differences, while keeping it simple and easy to understand. One possible approach is to consider the portfolio's volatility and liquidity from stress tests to give a clearer picture. "While ensuring simplicity and ease of understanding remains a key objective, perhaps the underlying volatility of the portfolio along with the liquidity of the portfolio from stress tests could be used to provide better colour all around," he added. This comes at a time when the holdings of mutual funds by <keyword id="20234284" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="domestic-institutional-investors" source="keywords">Domestic Institutional Investors</keyword> (DIIs) and individuals have risen from about 54.3% of free float of all mid cap and small cap companies, as of March 2020 to 60.6% as of March 2024. Several fund houses have proactively stopped lump sum investments in some small-cap schemes and also capped the amount that can be invested through <keyword id="20675888" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="systematic-investment-plan" source="keywords">Systematic Investment Plan</keyword> (SIP) into small-cap schemes. He also highlighted the potential mismatch between the demand for paper and the supply of fresh paper coming into the ecosystem. Gopalakrishnan said the industry can make more progress in streamlining operations and improving efficiency for investors. "At a time when instantaneous fund transfers have become ubiquitous in our country, perhaps we should look to improve our internal processes and the security settlement ecosystem, to ensure that funds are passed on to investors on the day of the settlement itself, rather than a day after or two days after," he added. Over the last few years, the mutual fund industry has made impressive strides, and is now playing a crucial role in channeling financial savings towards risk capital formation. This was driven by stable macros, increased formalization, robust corporate earnings, digitisation and user friendly access. Moreover, the number of mutual fund investors has grown significantly from about 2 crore as of March 2019 to nearly 4.7 crore as of June 2024, an impressive compounded annual growth rate of 18% during that period. Gopalakrishnan mentioned that several exciting initiatives are in the works, developed with input from all stakeholders. These include a proposed low-ticket SIP, further breaking down regular SIPs into smaller, more accessible units (sachetisation and tokenization), and the introduction of "mutual funds lite" regulations. These new regulations will simplify rules for passively managed funds, reducing the compliance burden and encouraging competition and innovation. Additionally, a new class of higher-risk schemes is proposed for investors with a greater capacity to handle risk.

SEBI asks mutual fund industry to proactively conduct stress test

New Delhi, Capital markets regulator Sebi on Friday came out with a procedure for vault managers to seek prior approval from the watchdog in case of a change in control. The vault manager is regulated as a Sebi intermediary for providing vaulting services meant for gold deposited to create electronic gold receipts (EGRs). The obligations of the vault manager include accepting deposits, storage, and safekeeping of gold, creation as well as withdrawal of EGR, grievance redressal, and periodic reconciliation of physical gold with the records of the depository. Under the procedure, Sebi said that an application should be made by the vault managers to the regulator for prior approval through the Intermediary Portal, according to a circular. "Applications for fresh registration under a change in control shall be made to Sebi within six months from the date of prior approval," the regulator said. The matters which involve a scheme of arrangement and need sanction from the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), the vault manager would have to ensure that the application seeking approval for the proposed change in control would be filed with Sebi before applying with NCLT. The validity of such in-principle approval from Sebi would be three months within which the relevant application should be made to NCLT. Within 15 days from the date of the order of NCLT, the vault manager would have to submit the required documents to Sebi for final approval. The procedure would come into force with immediate effect, the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Sebi) said in a circular.

Sebi issues procedure for seeking prior approval for change in control of vault managers

<ul><li><keyword id="35210" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="sebi" source="Orion">SEBI</keyword> has introduced new investment criteria to mitigate risks associated with <keyword id="509133" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="fractional-ownership" source="Orion">fractional ownership</keyword> of <keyword id="6354553" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="real-estate" source="Orion">real estate</keyword>. </li><li>You should research the <keyword id="6354516" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="property" source="Orion">property</keyword>, its location, market trends, and potential risks before investing. </li><li>Fractional ownership platforms operate by purchasing pre-leased commercial properties and dividing the ownership among investors. </li></ul>Owning real estate is not just a financial decision, in many cases, it’s a deep-rooted emotional one for many households. Buying commercial real estate, on the other hand, has always been touted as a wise economic decision. But how can one own such an asset if you can’t afford it given that the price of commercial properties is often too high for most individuals? You can still invest to avail a slice of real estate through fractional ownership! Minimum investment required Previously, the minimum investment required for fractional ownership of real estate varied, typically ranging from ₹10 to ₹25 lakhs. However, most platforms standardised the minimum investment at ₹25 lakhs. With the introduction of new regulations from SEBI, this threshold has been lowered to ₹10 lakhs making it more accessible to a broader range of investors. Fractional ownership options in India are still limited. However, while the concept is relatively new, it has quickly garnered <keyword id="6368449" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="investor" source="Orion">investor</keyword> interest. The fractional ownership industry is currently estimated to have ₹4,000 crores AUM and is expected to experience substantial growth, with projections suggesting it could reach a size of $5 Bn+ AUM by 2030, as per a JLL report. The number of platforms offering these investment opportunities is still limited, reflecting the industry's early stage of development. However, there were no defined rules on fractional ownership until SEBI stepped in recently. What SEBI says regarding fractional ownership To safeguard investor interests and foster growth in the Real Estate Investment Trusts (REIT) and fractional ownership market, SEBI has implemented a distinct framework tailored for small and medium (SM) (REITs). “SM REITs are structures that pool funds ranging from at least ₹50 crore to less than ₹500 crore, with the aim of issuing units to a minimum of 200 investors. These funds are utilised to acquire real estate assets, ensuring investors receive income generated from such assets. Going forward, any firm offering product (FOP) intending to establish an SM REIT must seek SM REIT registration from SEBI,” says Sudeep Chandran, Founder and COO of YOURS, a platform for Fractional Ownership of Luxury Second Homes. SEBI has also introduced new investment criteria to mitigate risks associated with fractional ownership. “It mandates that at least 95% of a scheme's assets must be invested in completed and income-generating properties, while the remaining 5% can be allocated to liquid assets. Furthermore, SEBI has issued additional rules and guidelines aimed at enhancing the sector's performance and safeguarding investors' interests," says Aryaman Vir, CEO of WiseX, a real estate investment platform that facilitates fractional ownership. Fractional ownership platforms Fractional ownership platforms operate by purchasing pre-leased commercial properties and then dividing the ownership among investors using a special purpose vehicle (SPV) structure. An SPV is a distinct legal entity set up for the sole purpose of acquiring a specific real estate asset, allowing for a clear separation of this investment from other financial engagements. Investors participate by acquiring securities issued by the SPV, effectively gaining a fractional share in the property. “The costs associated with the acquisition and maintenance of the property are distributed among the investors in the SPV, and these investors then share in the profits and returns from the asset. This sharing takes into account the management and maintenance fees that are levied by the FOP or by appointed third parties. Such a structure provides investors with an accessible route to earn from real estate, offering benefits like rental yields and potential asset appreciation,” says Vir. This model of investment significantly reduces the financial burden on individual investors, allowing them to attain steady income streams and long-term financial returns. Furthermore, it enables investors to diversify their investment portfolios by engaging in various real estate projects located in different areas, with each project having its own SPV. What you should keep in mind Before you enter into an agreement, review the agreement thoroughly to understand your rights, responsibilities, and any potential limitations or restrictions associated with the fractional ownership arrangement. “Like traditional property investment, due diligence is a must. You should research the property, its location, market trends, and potential risks before investing. Consider factors such as property valuation, maintenance costs, and resale prospects,” says Chandran. Also, when you co-own a property through a platform, credibility, reputation, and track record of the fractional ownership platform facilitating the investment also become important. Look for platforms that have a reliable track record of adhering to regulatory guidelines, providing transparent information, and offering robust investor protection mechanisms.

You can own a fraction of a real estate property, but it pays to keep the following in mind

New Delhi, Capital markets regulator Sebi on Monday proposed to provide flexibility to Alternative Investment Funds (AIFs), <keyword id="20198292" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="venture-capital-funds" source="keywords">Venture Capital Funds</keyword> (VCFs) and their investors to deal with unliquidated investments of their schemes beyond expiry of tenure. In its consultation paper, the regulator suggested that instead of launching a new liquidation scheme by AIFs, the same scheme itself can be allowed to continue with the unliquidated investments beyond their tenure for a certain period or dissolution period for fully liquidating their unliquidated investments. Additionally, the regulator proposed extending flexibility of the dissolution process to venture capital funds through migration to the <keyword id="19903848" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="aif" source="keywords">AIF</keyword> regime. At present, the option to launch liquidation scheme is available only to those schemes of AIFs which are under 'Liquidation Period'-- the period of one year following the expiry of tenure of the scheme for fully liquidating the scheme and not available to VCFs, irrespective of whether their tenure has expired or not. The Securities and Exchange Board of India (Sebi) has sought public comments till February 2 on the proposal. The proposal came after Sebi received representations from participants in the AIF industry highlighting certain tax related issues. They also highlighted that setting up a liquidation scheme and winding up the original AIF scheme is a process involving time, cost, and efforts, which directly or indirectly, would ultimately be paid by investors. In the consultation paper, the regulator suggested that during the liquidation period of an AIF scheme, if the AIF decides to opt for dissolution period, then AIF should obtain positive consent of 75 per cent of investors by value of their investment in the scheme. After obtaining the consent, the AIF should arrange bids for a minimum of 25 per cent of the value of the unliquidated investments. The bids should be arranged for units representing consolidated value of all unliquidated investments of the scheme's investment portfolio. Sebi suggested that investor approval and bid should be obtained by the AIF before the expiry of the Liquidation Period of the scheme. "Liquidation schemes that have already been launched by AIFs shall be grand-fathered," Sebi said. The regulator also suggested one-time flexibility to AIF schemes, whose Liquidation Period has expired or would be expiring within one month from the date of notification in this regard, to deal with unliquidated investment. Also, it has recommended extending flexibility of the dissolution process to venture capital funds through migration to the AIF regime. It further suggested that such migration should be smooth and cost effective. Under the <keyword id="20198293" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="vcf-regulations" source="keywords">VCF Regulations</keyword>, VCFs are required to liquidate their investments within three months from the expiry of their tenure, whereas AIF Regulations provide AIFs a Liquidation Period of 12 months for the said purpose. There is no provision in <keyword id="20198294" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="vcf" source="keywords">VCF</keyword> Regulations for extension of tenure of VCF scheme. Therefore, any VCF operating beyond their tenure specified in the Private <keyword id="20198291" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="placement-memorandum" source="keywords">Placement Memorandum</keyword> (PPM) is in violation of the VCF rules. Accordingly, Sebi suggested a new framework to facilitate VCFs to migrate to AIF Regulations, so that the proposed flexibility of Liquidation Period and the flexibility of dealing with unliquidated investments by opting for dissolution period / process, can be availed by VCFs. Under the proposed regulatory framework for migration of VCFs to AIF Regulations, a sub-category should be created under Category I - VCFs called Migrated VCFs. Such VCFs can migrate themselves within 6 months of the date of Sebi's notification in this regard. Sebi suggested that certain flexibilities under VCF rules should continue to be availed by migrated VCFs and accordingly the migrated VCFs should be exempted from the requirements of minimum investment requirement in AIF, minimum corpus size, maximum number of investors in a scheme, manner of calculation of tenure and audit of terms of PPM. Moreover, certain benefits of AIF Regulations that are not available under VCF rule should be extended to migrated VCFs.

Sebi mulls flexibility for AIF, VCFs to deal with unliquidated investments beyond tenure expiry

New Delhi, Clamping down on unauthorised investment advisory services offered in the name of '<keyword id="19268011" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="baap-of-chart" source="Orion">Baap of Chart</keyword>', regulator Sebi on Wednesday barred three entities from the securities market and ordered impounding illegal gains worth over Rs 17 crore. <keyword id="19264697" type="General" weightage="50" keywordseo="mohammad-nasiruddin-ansari" source="Orion">Mohammad Nasiruddin Ansari</keyword>, who described himself as an investment wizard, provided recommendations on stocks in the name of 'Baap of Chart' through the social media platform X and messaging app Telegram. The recommendations were given in the garb of providing educational training related to the securities market, according to Sebi. Besides Ansari, Padamati and <keyword id="19271004" type="General" weightage="80" keywordseo="golden-syndicate" source="Orion">Golden Syndicate</keyword> Ventures have been barred from the securities markets until further orders. Sebi directed them to cease and desist from acting as or holding themselves out to be investment advisors, whether using 'Baap of Chart' or otherwise. In its 45-page interim order cum show cause notice, Sebi found that Rs 17.21 crore has been accumulated during a period of just over two years from carrying out investment advisory activities, which are both unregistered and fraudulent. In view of receipt of fees for 'educational courses' directly in their bank accounts prima facie, the regulator concluded that Nasir, Padamati and Golden Syndicate Ventures are jointly and severally liable for alleged unlawful gains as an interim measure. "I cannot ignore the risk that the said Noticees (Nasir, Padamati and Golden Syndicate) may divert the alleged unlawful gains before directions for disgorgement/refund, etc, if any, are passed. "Further, I note that in his videos/ social media posts on 'courses' of Baap of Chart, Nasir repeatedly emphasises on providing access to live trading during his courses," Sebi's whole-time member <keyword id="183908" type="General" weightage="50" keywordseo="ananth-narayan" source="Orion">Ananth Narayan</keyword> G said in the order. Therefore, non-interference at this stage would result in irreparable injury to interests of the securities market and the investors, as per the order. "I am convinced that the balance of convenience lies in passing interim directions against them for preventing the continuation of any further fraudulent or unregistered activities in the interest of investors, and for impounding and retaining such quantified alleged illegal gains," Ananth Narayan G added. By indulging in such activities, the entities flouted the provisions of PFUTP (Prohibition of Fraudulent and Unfair Trade Practices) and Investment Adviser (IA) rules. Further, the regulator directed Nasir, Padamati, <keyword id="19271005" type="General" weightage="50" keywordseo="tabraiz-abdullah" source="Orion">Tabraiz Abdullah</keyword>, Asif Iqbal Wani, Golden Syndicate Ventures, Mansha Abdullah and Jadav Vamshi to jointly and severally disgorge the Rs 17.21 crore collected from clients/ investors through unregistered investment advisory activities. The markets watchdog also directed them to refrain from accessing as well as associating themselves with the securities markets for an appropriate period. The order came after Sebi analysed certain tweets on social media platforms X and Telegram, where Nasir was prima facie observed to be providing recommendations (buy/sell) through social media in the name of 'Baap of Chart' in the garb of providing educational training related to the securities market. Thereafter, the regulator initiated the examination against Nasir in order to ascertain whether he was engaged in offering investment advisory services without having Sebi's registration through social media/other means and thereby, flouting the regulatory norms. The examination period in the matter is from January 2021 to July 2023.

You Searched For "SEBI new rules" and got 7 results

Sebi proposes to allow InvITs, REITs, SM REITs to use interest rate derivatives for hedging risk

PTI

Sebi bans Rana Sugars' promoters from securities market for 2 years, imposes Rs 63 crore fine

PTI

SEBI asks mutual fund industry to proactively conduct stress test

PTI

Sebi issues procedure for seeking prior approval for change in control of vault managers

PTI

You can own a fraction of a real estate property, but it pays to keep the following in mind

Anagh Pal

Sebi mulls flexibility for AIF, VCFs to deal with unliquidated investments beyond tenure expiry

PTI

Baap of Chart: Sebi bars three entities and impounds illegal gains

PTI

Popular Keywords

Buying Guides