The Securities Appellate Tribunal (SAT) has directed Avadhut Sathe Trading Academy Pvt Ltd deposit ₹100 crore, granting partial relief in its appeal challenging the market regulator’s interim order that had asked the academy and its owners to pay ₹546 crore for alleged illegal gains.
The court also ordered that the paras in the interim order freezing the bank accounts and barring appellants from trading shall cease to apply on payment of the amount.
“In view of the fact that fixed assets are worth ₹100 crore, taking into consideration the tax component of ₹166 crore, in our view, ends of justice would be met by directing the appellants to deposit a sum of ₹100 crore in the bank and restraining them from alienating the fixed assets,” wrote Justice P.S Dinesh Kumar in the order.
The Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) had charged the academy, its owner Avadhut Sathe, and his spouse Gouri Sathe with using live market data to place trades under the guise of educational activities, and with allegedly providing investment advice through whatsapp groups without a license.
The SAT arrived at the revised amount after deducting income tax and GST payments, as well as money donated as CSR and to government funds like PM CARES. Further, it deducted the value of the company’s fixed assets from the charged amount.
Advocate Janak Dwrakdas, appearing for Mr. Sathe, argued against the urgency for “harsh orders” passed by SEBI, under the impression that the initial amount of ₹546 crore would be siphoned-off.
“The directions in the impugned order are impossible to comply because, on one hand, SEBI has frozen all bank accounts and restrained the appellants from accessing the securities market, on the other hand, SEBI has directed to place a deposit of ₹546 crore,” Mr. Dwarakdas contended. He said the interim order was in violation of constitutional rights.
SEBI counsel Chetan Kapadia, opposing the plea, argued the academy published and promoted selective profitable trades and claimed that the academy’s students were earning through trading. However, evidence including testimonials, videos of classroom sessions, Whatsapp group chats, and trading patterns of students showed the claims to be false, Mr. Kapadia argued. Further, he contended that Mr. Dwarakdas had only argued about the violation of constitutional rights, not about the facts of the case.
Justice Dinesh Kumar said both parties would have four weeks to file their replies and and clarified that the final order by the Whole Time Member of SEBI would be passed independently of the SAT’s directions.
