Sugar production in the upcoming season, staring 1st October, is projected to grow 27%...
The apex court dismissed the company’s plea for lifting the 7-year ban from accessing the market, which was imposed by SEBI last November following irregularities in the company's IPO in 2006
The Supreme Court (SC) today dismissed a petition by Madras-based entertainment company, Pyramid Saimira, challenging a seven-year trading ban imposed on it by market regulator Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI), reports PTI.
The bench, headed by chief justice S H Kapadia, dismissed the petition filed by the company, PS Theatre, requesting the court to lift the seven-year ban from accessing the market, which was imposed by SEBI last November following irregularities in the company's initial public offering (IPO) in 2006.
"We do not want such firms to continue... in the matter of fraud, we do not do anything," the bench said while declining the company's plea.
The company had challenged the order of the securities appellate tribunal, which had on 10 November, 2009, upheld the SEBI order.
The pension regulator has suddenly initiated a consultation process with market participants for the formation of new administrative guidelines for the New Pension Scheme. Does it set the stage for a makeover of the NPS?
After the mutual fund and insurance regulators have done their bit for investors, is it now time for the pension regulator to leave its mark? The Pension Fund Regulatory and Development Authority (PFRDA) which got a new chairman in Yogesh Agarwal (former chairman of IDBI), on 7th June, has invited comments from various market participants and the public at large on the first draft of administrative guidelines proposed to be issued for the New Pension Scheme (NPS). These include guidelines for the Central Recordkeeping Agency, Custodian and Depository Participant, fees and charges, New Pension System Trust, Points of Presence and the Subscribers Education and Protection Fund. The guidelines would be further reviewed in light of the comments received and any other developments.
Commenting on the purpose for bringing out new guidelines, a PFRDA official said, "We want to know what we have missed out in the past and enhance the scope of the scheme in terms of regulation. We wish to provide sufficient opportunity to the public to participate in this process. We expect to benefit from the comments received from various market participants in this regard. Once this is completed, it will offer guidance to the participants."
Rani Nair, executive director of PFRDA said, "We have invited comments to see whether there is anything which has not been covered yet. As we are moving on, we are bringing various value-plus services for our customers. This is a part of such services. We are putting in place some legally enforceable guidelines for various market intermediaries to ensure that customers are protected and not misled. Customers will be made aware of the responsibilities of different intermediaries, once the guidelines are in place." Asked whether any major policy shifts are being planned, she said that the basic architecture for the NPS would remain the same.
NPS allows one to save regularly in a scheme until the age of 60. The scheme mixes investment in safe debt and equity stocks (of Sensex and Nifty) in different proportions. However, NPS has so far received a very poor response from the general public. There is nobody to explain and sell the scheme, since there is no commission involved in selling it.
The PFRDA may not be willing to admit it, but some sweeping changes seem to be on the cards for the nascent pension scheme. Pension fund managers (PFMs) have sought major changes in the fee structure. According to a media report, in a recent meeting with the PFRDA chairman, the PFMs complained that the low management fees (0.0009% of assets under management) are not healthy for the system. It is another matter that the PFMs themselves bid for these prices and are now crying wolf.
The new chairman seems willing to look at the NPS afresh. He is on a drive to collect feedback from the participants so as to make NPS more popular. After mutual funds and Unit-linked Insurance Plans, now NPS may undergo significant change. Only, it will be in the opposite direction. While the stock market regulator has cut down on upfront commissions as incentive for mutual funds and the insurance regulator has made ULIPs cheaper by reducing incentives, PFRDA would want to do the opposite - add a bit of incentive to make NPS work.