PAK LAW GPT — Pakistan Case Law AI justice scale emblemPAK LAW GPTCase law · Urdu & English

XPERT SECURITIES LIMITED vs DIRECTOR/HOD (ADJUDICATION-I), ADJUDICATION DIVISION S — 2024 CLD 869 SECURITIES-AND-EXCHANGE-COMMISSION-OF-PAKISTAN

Case information

Citation
2024 CLD 869 SECURITIES-AND-EXCHANGE-COMMISSION-OF-PAKISTAN
Year
2024
Reporter
CLD
Parties
XPERT SECURITIES LIMITED vs DIRECTOR/HOD (ADJUDICATION-I), ADJUDICATION DIVISION S
Provisions referred to
S. 6; S. 33---M

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

Judgment text as reported

XPERT SECURITIES LIMITED VS DIRECTOR/HOD (ADJUDICATION-I), ADJUDICATION DIVISION S. 6(a)(2)(h)---Securities and Exchange Commission of Pakistan (anti Money Laundering and Countering Financing of Terrorism) Regulations, 2018, Reglns. 5(a) & 27(2)(c)---Securities and Exchange Commission of Pakistan act (XLII of 1997), S. 33---Mandatory provisions, contravention of---Securities and Exchange Commission of Pakistan (SECP) imposed a penalty of Rs.60,000/- on the appellant (a Trading Rights Entitlement Certificate (TREC) holder of the Pakistan Stock Exchange Limited (PSX) and licensed as a securities broker) for the contravention of the Securities and Exchange Commission of Pakistan (anti Money Laundering and Countering Financing of Terrorism) Regulations, 2018---Contention of the appellant was that it had never engaged in any business or transaction nor had any clients---Validity---Despite the fact that the appellant did not have any transactions or clients, it was still obligated to adhere to the law as per the requirements at the time of registration as TREC---However, the appellant had addressed the non-compliance issues and submitted a compliance report to the respondent/SECP prior to the hearing---Said step by the appellant should be seen as a mitigating factor---Respondent / SECP did not appropriately weigh these circumstances before imposing the penalty---appellate Bench, considering the said mitigating circumstances, set-aside the penalty imposing impugned order passed by the SECP---appeal, filed by the company, was allowed in, circumstances.

Other judgments reported in 2024 CLD

Back to the case-law library · Search Pakistani case law in Urdu or English