Sebi disposes of case against former Tata Communications employee

TCL had already imposed a penalty of Rs 1.21 lakh on Shah by way deducting the amount from his annual bonus.

Update: 2017-11-11 05:55 GMT
NPAs identified by RBI exceed 15 per cent of the incremental gross NPAs for the reference period.

New Delhi: Markets regulator Sebi has disposed of a case against a former employee of Tata Communications Ltd (TCL) in a matter related to violation of insider trading norms.

In an order dated November 9, Sebi observed that Nirav Shah -- a former corporate strategy deputy general manager of TCL -- had indulged in opposite transactions of American Depository Receipts (ADRs) within six months on two occasions between February and July, 2010, thereby violating the PIT (Prohibition of Insider Trading) Regulations.

As per PIT Regulations, all directors or officers or designated employees who buy or sell any number of shares of the company should not enter into an opposite transaction during the next six months following the prior transaction.

Shah, who was holding ADRs of TCL before joining it on February 1, 2010, was a designated employee, the company informed Sebi through an email dated July 8, 2014.

However, taking note of the fact that TCL had already imposed a penalty of Rs 1.21 lakh on Shah by way deducting the amount from his annual bonus, the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Sebi) disposed of the case against him.

TCL also confirmed to the regulator, through an email dated October 31, 2017, that Shah was not in employment of the firm from November 13, 2014.

Sebi said that the important issue cannot be ignored that for the same violation, the initial regulator in such situation (TCL) has already taken suitable action against Shah by imposing penalty and issuing him a warning letter.

"... actions taken by the TCL, are commensurate to the violation committed by the noticee (Shah)," Sebi said.

The regulator had received a reference from TCL dated February 14, 2014, informing that Shah had dealt in ADRs of the company and failed to make upfront disclosure regarding his ADR holding and on certain occasions had entered into opposite transactions in violation of PIT Regulations.  

Similar News