CLD 2018

2018 PLP 1069 (CLD)

MAC SECURITIES (PVT.) LIMITED — Appellant Versus ASIF JALAL BHATTI, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR (SMD), SECP, ISLAMABAD and another — Respondents

Jurisdiction / Court
Securities and Exchange Commission of Pakistan
Decided Date
2018-May-8
Honorable Judges
N/A
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 2018 PLP 1069 (CLD)
Forum / Court Securities and Exchange Commission of Pakistan
Bench Members N/A
Parties MAC SECURITIES (PVT.) LIMITED — Appellant Versus ASIF JALAL BHATTI, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR (SMD), SECP, ISLAMABAD and another — Respondents
Primary Law Securities and Exchange Ordinance (XVII of 1969)
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2018 PLP 1069 (CLD)?

This judgment primarily cites: Securities and Exchange Ordinance (XVII of 1969) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.

Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2018 PLP 1069 (CLD)?

The case was heard and decided by the Securities and Exchange Commission of Pakistan bench comprising: N/A.

Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?

Cite this legal precedent as: 2018 PLP 1069 (CLD) (MAC SECURITIES (PVT.) LIMITED — Appellant Versus ASIF JALAL BHATTI, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR (SMD), SECP, ISLAMABAD and another — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

Securities and Exchange Ordinance (XVII of 1969)

Representation

  • Asif Khan, Deputy Director (SMD) and Salman Arshad, Deputy Director (SMD) for Respondents.

Headnotes / Summary

Ss. 6 & 22

Brokers and Agents Registration Rules, 2001, R.8

Failure to submit financial information through online Financial Reporting System (FRS)

Securities and Exchange Commission of Pakistan, directed all the TREC holders including the appellant company to submit their financial information through online Financial Reporting System (FRS) for the quarter ended on September, 2013

Commission, directed stock exchanges to ensure that all TREC holders must submit their financial returns to the Commission through said reporting system, within stipulated time

Stock Exchanges disseminated the said directions on their websites for information and compliance

Appellant Company had failed to comply with said requirements and Executive Director (SMD), imposed a penalty of Rs.300,000 on the appellant on account of failure to discharge the regulatory requirements

Appellant Company could not be exonerated from established regulatory violations

Past compliance of appellant Company and non-availability of 'KATS' terminal ID password for online filing through FRs, were sufficient mitigating factors for a lenient view

While maintaining the impugned order, amount of penalty was reduced to Rs.1,50,000 in appeal.

Judgment & Decree

This Order is in the matter of Appeal No. 38 of 2017 filed by MAC Securities (Pvt.) Limited (the Appellant) against the Order dated 21/04/17 (the Impugned Order) passed by the Executive Director (PRPD) under Section 22 of the Securities and Exchange Ordinance, 1969 (the Ordinance) and Rule 8 of the Brokers and Agents Registration Rules, 2001 (the Rules).

2. The Securities and Exchange Commission of Pakistan (the Commission), vide a circular No.4/2013 dated 16/04/13 and in exercise of powers conferred under Section 6(3) of the Ordinance read with the Third Schedule of the Rules, directed all the TREC holders including the Appellant to submit their financial information through online Financial reporting System (FRS) for the quarter ended on September, 2013. The Commission vide letters dated January 30, 2014, June 10, 2015 and November 03, 2015 directed the stock exchanges to ensure that all TREC holders must submit their financial returns to the Commission through online reporting system within the stipulated time and accordingly the stock exchanges disseminated the said direction on their websites for information and compliance, however, the Appellant failed to comply with the requirements for the following periods; S.No. Quarter Detail Due Date Status

1. September 2013 30/10/2013 Not Filed

2. December 2013 30/01/2014 Not Filed

3. March 2014 30/04/2014 Not Filed

4. June 2014 30/07/2014 Not Filed

5. September 2014 30/10/2014 Not Filed

6. December 2014 30/01/2015 Not Filed

7. March 2015 30/04/2015 Not Filed

8. June 2015 30/07/2015 Not Filed

9. September 2015 30/10/2015 Not Filed

10. December 2015 30/01/2016 Not Filed

11. March 2016 30/04/2016 Not Filed

12. June 2016 30/07/2016 Not Filed

3. A Show Cause Notice dated 30/12/16 (the SCN) was issued to the Appellant for the non-compliance. The Appellant in its reply dated 11/01/17 stated that it is not active, has no KATS terminal ID and Password, and requested for withdrawal of the SCN on this ground. However the Respondent rejected the request, vide letter dated 02/02/17 and fixed the matter for hearing on 08/02/17. The Appellants' representative attended the hearing and reiterated their previous stance and sought further time for filing of financial information through FRS, and gave the commitment for filing of financial information within the extended time. In view of the Appellant's commitment, the Commission, vide letter dated 09/02/17 issued a final deadline for submission of the financial information through FRS and asked the Appellant to submit a compliance report on or before 28/02/17, however, it failed to comply with the direction. Therefore, the Respondent imposed a penalty of Rs.300,000/- on the Appellant due to failure to discharge the regulatory requirements.

4. The Appellant preferred this appeal against the Impugned Order and stated that the Respondent has not considered the contentions of the Appellant. The Respondent has rebutted the Appellant stance and stated that due consideration was given to the Appellant 'contentions.

5. The Appellate Bench (the Bench) has heard the parties and perused the record. In view of record, the Appellant has not complied the requirements of online filing of quarterly accounts through FRS since September 2013. In view of the aforesaid, the Appellant cannot be exonerated from established regulatory violations. However, past compliance of Appellant and non-availability of KATS terminal, ID and password for online filing through FRS are sufficient mitigating factors for a lenient view. Therefore, while maintaining the Impugned Order we hereby reduce the amount of penalty to Rs.150,000/- (One Hundred and Fifty Thousand Rupees).

6. The Appeal is disposed of accordingly, without any order as to cost. HBT/1/SECP Order accordingly.