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

Following statements made by <keyword id="198572" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="Madhabi-Puri-Buch" source="Orion">Madhabi Puri Buch</keyword> and her husband <keyword id="192394" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="Dhaval-Buch" source="Orion">Dhaval Buch</keyword>, concerning allegations raised by <keyword id="9916845" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="Hindenburg-Research" source="Orion">Hindenburg Research</keyword> on August 10, the US short seller has posed new questions for the <keyword id="20914154" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="SEBI-Chairperson" source="keywords">SEBI Chairperson</keyword> alleging that her response contained several significant admissions and raised critical new questions. In a social media post on 'X', the US short seller stated that "<keyword id="35210" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="SEBI" source="Orion">SEBI</keyword> Chairperson <keyword id="19557079" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="Madhabi-Buch" source="Orion">Madhabi Buch</keyword>'s response to our report includes several important admissions and raises numerous new critical questions." Further the post said that the <keyword id="84055" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="SEBI-chief" source="Orion">SEBI chief</keyword>'s response confirms her investment in an obscure Bermuda/Mauritius fund structure, alongside money allegedly siphoned by Vinod Adani. "SEBI was tasked with investigating investment funds relating to the Admatter, which would include funds Ms Buch was personally invested in and funds by the same sponsor which were specifically highlighted in our original report. This is obviously a massive conflict of interest," <keyword id="191733" type="General" weightage="100" keywordseo="Hindenburg" source="Orion">Hindenburg</keyword> alleged. The US short seller also raised concerns about the financial statements of SEBI Chief's Singapore consulting entities during her tenure at SEBI. "The Singaporean consulting entity she set up doesn't publicly report its financials like revenue or profit, so it's impossible to see how much money this entity has earned during her time at SEBI. The Indian entity, still 99 per cent owned by the SEBI Chairperson, has generated Rs 23.985 million (US ~ USD 312,000) in revenue (i.e. consulting) during the financial years ('22, '23, and '24), while she was serving as Chairperson, per its financial statements," said Hindenburg. Hindenburg also alleged that <keyword id="22754143" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="whistleblower-documents" source="Orion">whistleblower documents</keyword> have revealed that Buch used her personal email to conduct business under her husband's name while serving as a whole-time member of SEBI. In 2017, just weeks before her appointment, she ensured that accounts with ties to Adani were registered solely in the name of her husband, Dhaval Buch. Earlier, the SEBI Chairperson and her husband had said that the investment in the fund referred to in the Hindenurg report was made before she had taken up the job. The statement said, "The investment in the fund referred to in the Hindenburg report was made in 2015 when they were both private citizens living in Singapore and almost 2 years before Madhabi joined SEBI, even as a Whole Time Member. " "The decision to invest in this fund was because the Chief Investment Officer, Anil Ahuja, is Dhaval's childhood friend from school and IIT Delhi and, being an ex-employee of Citibank, J.P. Morgan and 3i Group plc, had many decades of a strong investing career. The fact that these were the drivers of the investment decision is borne out by the fact that when, in 2018, Ahuja, left his position as CIO of the fund, we redeemed the investment in that fund," the statement further reads."As confirmed by Anil Ahuja, at no point in time did the fund invest in any bond, equity, or derivative of any Adani group company," the statement had added. On Saturday, the US-based firm alleged that SEBI's Chairperson Madhabi Buch and her husband had a stake in "both the obscure offshore entities used in the Adani money siphoning scandal" In January 2023, Hindenburg published a report accusing the Adani Group of financial irregularities, leading to a significant drop in the company's stock price. The group at the time had rubbished these claims. In January 2024, the Supreme Court refused to transfer the probe into the allegations of stock price manipulation by the Adani group to an SIT and directed market regulator SEBI to complete its probe into two pending cases within three months. Earlier this year the SC also dismissed a plea seeking to review the verdict that had sought investigation by the market watchdog SEBI in the <keyword id="16435872" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="Adani-Hindenburg-case" source="Orion">Adani-Hindenburg case</keyword>.

Hindenburg poses new questions for SEBI Chairperson after she denies allegations

New Delhi [India], November 24 (ANI): Hearing the Adani-Hindenburg matter, the <keyword id="6354977" type="General" weightage="50" keywordseo="supreme-court" source="Orion">Supreme Court</keyword> on Friday remarked that it is easy to make allegations against anyone and opined the petitioners to show some responsibility while levelling charges against any party. A bench of Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, also comprising justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra passed the remarks when one of the petitioners raised questions over members of the expert committee. Advocate Prashant Bhushan, appearing for one of the petitioners, told the court about one of the members of the expert committee Somashekhar Sundaresan, noting that he has been a lawyer representing Adin various forums including in the SEBI Board. CJI DY Chandrachud raised an objection to the petitioner's submission and remarked that if one goes with the theory that a lawyer who appeared 17 years ago can now not be appointed to the committee and like this, no lawyer who has appeared for an accused should become a High Court judge. CJI DY Chandrachud remarked that he is not an in-house counsel he was a lawyer and he appeared in 2006 and this conflict arose 17 years later. There has to be some responsibility for the allegations being levelled, SC remarked. During the hearing, the court also remarked that it is easy to make allegations and one must be also very careful. "We are not giving a character certificate to anyone," SC noted. When the hearing commenced today, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta told the top court that SEBI is not seeking an extension of further investigation matters relating to the Hindenburg report. Out of 24 cases in the Adani-Hindenburg matter, investigations in 22 cases are over For the remaining two cases, they need information from foreign regulators and others and they have been in consultation with them, SG Mehta informed the court. The court then said that it had intervened in the matter due to the extreme volatility of the stock market and sought to know what is SEBI planning to do for such kind of volatility and planning to protect investors in cases like short selling. SG Tushar Mehta took the court through the recommendations of the Expert Committee which SEBI has agreed with in principle. Advocate Prashant Bhushan, appearing for the petitioner, told the SC that there were many factual revelations in the Hindenburg report. He raised doubts about SEBI's role in the matter and says a lot of information was available to it in 2014. Bhushan informed the SC about a letter written in 2014 by the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence regarding substantial money siphoned to Mauritius. SG Mehta questioned Bhushan over this and said that DRI concluded the proceedings in 2017. The court remarked that to advocate Bhushan, appearing for the petitioner, it is easy to make allegations and one must be also very careful. SG Tushar Mehta urged the top court to stop these kinds of allegations. The court remarked that SEBI, a statutory body looks into stock market frauds. SG Tushar Mehta said that there is a growing tendency to plant stories outside India to influence decisions within India. After hearing the matter in length, the court reserved the order on various aspects related to the issue. Earlier, the <keyword id="6355630" type="General" weightage="50" keywordseo="securities-and-exchange-board-of-india" source="Orion">Securities and Exchange Board of India</keyword> (SEBI) filed a status report before the Supreme Court apprising it that out of 24 investigations arising out of the Hindenburg report, 22 are final in nature and 2 are interim in nature. The investigation was carried out in compliance with the directions of the top court's order dated March 2, 2023, SEBI has investigated 24 matters. In the mid of May, the top court gave three months more time to the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) to conduct a probe into the Hindenburg report SEBI was granted time till 14th August 2023 to conduct the probe. On March 2, the <keyword id="6356229" type="General" weightage="80" keywordseo="apex-court" source="Orion">apex court</keyword> directed the capital market regulator SEBI to investigate any violations of securities law by the <keyword id="6367820" type="General" weightage="80" keywordseo="adani-group" source="Orion">Adani Group</keyword> in the wake of the Hindenburg report, which led to a massive wipeout of more than USD140 billion of the Adani Group's market value. Supreme Court, on March 2, set up an expert committee on the issue arising from the <keyword id="9916845" type="General" weightage="50" keywordseo="hindenburg-research" source="Orion">Hindenburg Research</keyword> report on Adani Group companies. The committee will consist of six members, headed by former apex court judge Justice AM Sapre. The top court had then asked SEBI to file a status report within two months. The apex court was then hearing petitions pertaining to the Hindenburg report, including the constitution of a committee relating to regulatory mechanisms to protect investors' interests. The January 24 Hindenburg report alleged stock manipulation and fraud by the conglomerate. The Adani Group has attacked Hindenburg as "an unethical short seller", stating that the report by the New York-based entity was "nothing but a lie". A short-seller in the securities market books gains from the subsequent reduction in the prices of shares. (ANI)

Adani-Hindenburg case: Easy to make allegations, can't take unsubstantiated ones, remarks SC

The allegations of the US Short seller Hindenburg against <keyword id="19901201" type="General" weightage="100" keywordseo="Sebi" source="keywords">SEBI</keyword> Chairperson <keyword id="22743118" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="Madhabi-Buch" source="keywords">Madhabi Buch</keyword> and her husband have drawn sharp political reactions from the opposition parties. Reacting to the Hindenburg report, Samajwadi Party spokesperson Ghanshyam Tiwari on Sunday lashed out at the Modi government and said that the tenure of PM Modi will be known for 'Adani-waad'. "The whole world witnessed a different session with different ideologies but the term of PM Modi will be known as 'Adani-waad'. In this Adani-waad, they captured the whole economic system of India in such a way that Gautam Ad(<keyword id="19955648" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="Adani-Group" source="keywords" meta.keywordsubtype="org" meta.entityname="Adani Group" meta.hostid="83" meta.entityid="Adani Group">Adani Group</keyword>) could benefit, it looks like this is the only motive of PM Modi," he said. Referring to the Hindenburg Report alleging SEBI chief Madhabi Buch and her husband's stakes in "both the obscure offshore entities used in the Adani money siphoning scandal", Tiwari stated, "Hindenburg's report regarding the SEBI chief has triggered the integrity of the market regulator. Hindenburg alleged that SEBI is not investigating properly. Questions are being raised on the Adani Group continuously by the opposition. Anybody with a basic investigation can simply question how the Adani Group with different allegations of corruption, whether it is a coal scam or power, through the medium of offshoring, invested in the share markets. SEBI whose duty was to investigate and find out the criminals was deviating from the core issues." Aam Aadmi Party MP Sanjay Singh alleged that the Modi government is steeped in corruption and is trying to save "their friend Adani". Taking it to a social media post on X, Sanjay Singh wrote, "The Hindenburg revelations were hinted at 3 days before Modi ended the Parliament session. Modi Government is steeped in corruption from head to toe. To save his friend Adani, Modi Ji got the investigation done by the same SEBI Chairman who had committed the scam in connivance with Adani. SC should reconsider its decision." <keyword id="19895371" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="Congress" source="keywords" meta.keywordsubtype="org" meta.entityname="Congress" meta.hostid="83" meta.entityid="Congress">Congress</keyword> MP Manish Tewari said that a JPC must be constituted to go into the entire Hindenburg saga. "There are certain revelations by the <keyword id="20016892" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="Hindenburg-Research" source="keywords" meta.keywordsubtype="org" meta.entityname="Hindenburg Research" meta.hostid="83" meta.entityid="Hindenburg Research">Hindenburg Research</keyword> which have been put out in the public space. They require closer scrutiny...There seems to be some semblance of an alleged conflict of interest and so therefore under those circumstances there has been a demand in the public space for a while that the entire Hindenburg saga needs to be investigated properly by a <keyword id="21964200" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="Joint-Parliamentary-Committee" source="keywords" meta.keywordsubtype="org" meta.entityname="Joint Parliamentary Committee" meta.hostid="83" meta.entityid="Joint Parliamentary Committee">joint parliamentary committee</keyword>. It would be in the fitness of things if a joint parliamentary committee is constituted to go into all these issues at length," he said. Earlier in the day, shortly after US-based short seller Hindenburg Research on August 10 alleged that SEBI Chairperson Madhabi Buch and her husband had stakes in "both the obscure offshore entities used in the Adani money siphoning scandal," the SEBI Chairperson and her husband issued a joint statement rejecting the allegations. Madhabi Puri Buch and her husband accused Hindenburg Research, against whom SEBI has taken enforcement action, of character assassination. In the joint statement released to the media they said, "Our life and finances are an open book. All disclosures as required have already been furnished to SEBI over the years. We have no hesitation in disclosing any and all financial documents, including those that relate to the period when we were strictly private citizens, to any and every authority that may seek them. It is unfortunate that Hindenburg Research against whom SEBI has taken an Enforcement action and issued a show cause notice has chosen to attempt character assassination in response to the same." Earlier on Saturday, US short seller Hindenburg had alleged, "We had previously noted Adani's total confidence in continuing to operate without the risk of serious regulatory intervention, suggesting that this may be explained through Adani's relationship with SEBI Chairperson, Madhabi Buch." "What we hadn't realized: the current SEBI Chairperson and her husband, Dhaval Buch, had hidden stakes in the exact same obscure offshore Bermuda and Mauritius funds, found in the same complex nested structure, used by Vinod Adani," the report by the US hedge firm said. Hindenburg Research said it has made the new allegations based on documents provided by a whistleblower and investigations carried out by other entities. In January 2023, Hindenburg published a report accusing the Adani Group of financial irregularities, leading to a significant drop in the company's stock price. The group at the time had rubbished these claims. The Hindenburg report alleged stock manipulation and fraud by the conglomerate. The case is related to the allegations (part of a report by Hindenburg Research) that Adani had inflated its share prices. After these allegations were published, there was a sharp fall in the shares of various Adani group companies' stocks. In January 2024, the Supreme Court refused to transfer the probe into the allegations of stock price manipulation by the Adani group to an SIT and had directed market regulator SEBI to complete its probe into two pending cases within three months. Earlier this year, the SC also dismissed a plea seeking to review the verdict that had sought investigation by the market watchdog SEBI in the Adani-Hindenburg case.

Integrity of SEBI questioned, JPC probe into Hindenburg a must: INDIA bloc targets govt on Hindenburg allegations

The <keyword id="6355630" type="General" weightage="50" keywordseo="securities-and-exchange-board-of-india" source="Orion">Securities and Exchange Board of India</keyword> apprised the <keyword id="6354977" type="General" weightage="80" keywordseo="supreme-court" source="Orion">Supreme Court</keyword> on Monday that the market regulator is already investigating AdGroup companies since 2016 is factually baseless. SEBI has filed a rejoinder affidavit in response to a petition relating to <keyword id="191733" type="General" weightage="80" keywordseo="hindenburg" source="Orion">Hindenburg</keyword> Research's report on the <keyword id="6367820" type="General" weightage="80" keywordseo="adani-group" source="Orion">Adani Group</keyword>. SEBI had sought an extension to conclude the investigation in the report by US short-seller Hindenburg Research by a period of six months. The top court on Friday orally remarked that they will extend the time for the probe to SEBI, but not for six months and they can extend the time for the probe by three months. Petitioners had alleged that SEBI was probing the <keyword id="76451" type="General" weightage="100" keywordseo="adani" source="Orion">Adani</keyword> Group since 2016. SEBI told the SC that the investigation done earlier by SEBI pertains to the issuance of Global Depository Receipts ("GDRs") by 51 Indian listed companies, in respect of which investigation was conducted. SEBI submitted before the Supreme Court that no listed company of Adani Group was part of those 51 companies it was investigating. "Pursuant to the completion of the investigation, appropriate enforcement actions were taken in this matter. Hence, the allegation that the Securities and Exchange Board of India ("SEBI") is investigating Adani since 2016 is factually baseless. I, therefore, say and submit that reliance sought to be placed on the investigation pertaining to GDRs is wholly misplaced," SEBI said in a rejoinder affidavit. SEBI submitted before Supreme Court that in the context of an investigation into Minimum Public Shareholding ("MPS") norms, SEBI has already approached eleven overseas Regulators under the Multilateral Memorandum of Understanding ("MOU") with the International Organization of Securities Commissions ("IOSCO"). Various requests for information were made to these Regulators. The first request to overseas Regulators was made as early as October 6, 2020, and SEBI apprised the court. SEBI submitted before the Supreme Court that the application for extension of time filed by SEBI is meant to ensure carriage of justice keeping in mind the interest of investors and the securities market since any incorrect or premature conclusion of the case arrived at without full facts material on record would not serve the ends of justice and hence would be legally untenable. SEBI has informed Supreme Court that in respect of the investigation and examination relating to 12 transactions referred to in the Hindenburg Report, prima facie it is noted that these transactions are highly complex and have many sub-transactions across numerous jurisdictions and a rigorous investigation of these transactions would require collation of data/information from various sources including bank statements from multiple domestic as well as international banks, financial statements of onshore and offshore entities involved in the transactions and contracts and agreements, if any, entered between the entities along with other supporting documents. On March 2, the apex court directed the capital market regulator SEBI to investigate any violations of securities law by the Adani Group in the wake of the Hindenburg report, which led to a massive wipeout of more than USD140 billion of the Adani Group's market value. Supreme Court, on March 2, set up an expert committee on the issue arising from the Hindenburg Research report on Adani Group companies. The committee will consist of six members, headed by former apex court judge Justice AM Sapre. The top court had then asked SEBI to file a status report within two months. The apex court was then hearing petitions pertaining to the Hindenburg report, including on the constitution of a committee relating to regulatory mechanisms to protect investors' interests. The January 24 Hindenburg report alleged stock manipulation and fraud by the conglomerate. The Adani Group has attacked Hindenburg as "an unethical short seller", stating that the report by the New York-based entity was "nothing but a lie". A short-seller in the securities market books gains from the subsequent reduction in the prices of shares. SEE ALSO: <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/finance/news/fii-inflows-may-remain-consistent-in-may-with-turn-in-rate-cycle/articleshow/100234813.cms">FII inflows may remain consistent in May with turn in rate cycle</a> <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/tech/news/heres-how-googles-new-ai-updates-will-transform-your-search-experience/articleshow/100242791.cms">Here’s how Google’s new AI updates will transform your search experience</a> <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/tech/mobile/news/how-to-track-and-block-your-lost-smartphones-using-the-sanchar-saathi-portal/articleshow/100242116.cms">How to track and block your lost smartphones using the Sanchar Saathi portal</a>

SEBI investigating Adani since 2016 is factually baseless, regulator tells SC

The Supreme Court has dismissed the customs department appeal against <keyword id="76451" type="General" weightage="100" keywordseo="adani" source="Orion">Adani</keyword> Power Maharashtra Ltd. (<keyword id="334816" type="General" weightage="80" keywordseo="apml" source="Orion">APML</keyword>), Adani Power Rajasthan Ltd. (<keyword id="14511074" type="General" weightage="80" keywordseo="aprl" source="Orion">APRL</keyword>) and others in alleged over-valuation of imported goods matter. A bench comprising Justices Krishna Murari and <keyword id="1726232" type="General" weightage="50" keywordseo="sanjay-karol" source="Orion">Sanjay Karol</keyword>, after hearing detailed arguments in the matter from both sides, dismissed the appeal filed by the customs department against APML, APRL and others. According to the counsel familiar with the development, the apex court found that the project cost of APML and APRL was either similar or lower than the price of peers/competitors. The counsel added that the price was lesser than the benchmark per megawatt cost fixed by Central Electricity Regulatory Commission (CERC) and the contract was an EPC contract awarded to the lowest bidder following worldwide bidding called International Competitive Bidding (<keyword id="318416" type="General" weightage="80" keywordseo="icb" source="Orion">ICB</keyword>). According to the counsel, the apex court upheld the findings of both the lower authorities, i.e., adjudicating authority as well as appellate tribunal and confirmed that there was no overvaluation in import of capital goods. The top court dismissed the custom's appeal on Monday. APML &amp; APRL following ICB, imported goods required for setting up of thermal power projects in Maharashtra and Rajasthan. Likewise, consortium led by PMC Projects (India) pvt. ltd., which was awarded the contract following ICB, imported goods for setting up of transmission line and substation package for Maharashtra Eastern Grid Power Transmission Co. Ltd. (MEGPTCL). The Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI), in May 2014, issued show cause notices (SCNs) to APML, APRL, MEGPTCL and others alleging over-valuation in import of capital goods. The adjudicating authority of DRI in 2017, the same authority which issued the SCNs after dealing with it in detail, held that all the imports were genuine and concluded that the value declared is correct and is not required to be re-determined. Later, SCNs were dropped. In 2022, the appellate tribunal dismissed the plea filed by the customs department and confirmed that there was no overvaluation while importing the equipment by Adani. SEE ALSO: <a target="_blank" class="c-link c-message_attachment__title_link" href="https://www.businessinsider.in/business/startups/news/fashinza-raises-30-million-from-mars-growth-capital-and-liquidity-group/articleshow/99057241.cms">Fashinza raises $30 million from Mars Growth Capital and Liquidity Group</a> <a target="_blank" class="c-link c-message_attachment__title_link" href="https://www.businessinsider.in/india/news/indias-covid-cases-show-a-slight-drop-with-only-1539-new-infections-and-four-deaths-in-the-last-24-hours/articleshow/99057573.cms">India's Covid cases show a slight drop, with only 1,539 new infections and four deaths in the last 24 hours</a>

You Searched For "adani case sc" and got 5 results

Hindenburg poses new questions for SEBI Chairperson after she denies allegations

ANI

Adani-Hindenburg case: Easy to make allegations, can't take unsubstantiated ones, remarks SC

ANI

Integrity of SEBI questioned, JPC probe into Hindenburg a must: INDIA bloc targets govt on Hindenburg allegations

ANI

SEBI investigating Adani since 2016 is factually baseless, regulator tells SC

ANI

SC dismisses custom's plea claiming overvaluation in import of capital goods by Adani

IANS

Popular Keywords

Buying Guides