The networking, software, e-business services company was recently penalised by SEBI for making favourable statements to influence its stock price
Helios and Matheson Technology (H&M), the controversial company which was recently slapped with a fine of Rs50 lakh by the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) in a share price rigging case, is now planning to raise Rs500 crore.
In a filing to the National Stock Exchange (NSE) on 23 March 2011, giving details of its recently held annual general meeting, the company said that it is constantly looking for growth opportunities to become globally competitive and it considers it necessary at this time to raise some of the funds it requires through an issue of securities.
On 31 January 2011, SEBI imposed a penalty on H&M over some fake and favourable announcements that the company had passed on to the stock exchange in order to influence the movement of the stock price. In its show-cause notice to the company, SEBI said, "H&M had made various favourable corporate announcements during the investigation period, that is about the issue of bonus shares, dividend, and declared favourable unaudited quarterly results, etc, besides the announcement of acquiring three entities of vMoksha Technologies Pvt Ltd."
SEBI had also charged the company with not disclosing the status of the profitability of vMoksha companies that it allegedly acquired. The SEBI order said that H&M "failed to make announcements/disclosures with regard to price-sensitive information" and "had not informed the stock exchange about the interim developments such as (the fact that) its attempt to acquire three vMoksha companies had not materialised in the stipulated time period, i.e. within 120 days as specified in the SPA (share purchase agreement) and the judicial/arbitration proceedings which started in relation to the same."
Last week, H&M informed the NSE that it "has been examining various growth opportunities from time to time, in line with its objective of becoming globally competitive. While it is envisaged … thought prudent at this stage for the company to raise a part of this fund requirement through the issue of securities in the domestic/international market…"
It further stated that it is therefore, "proposed to issue appropriate securities for an amount not exceeding Rs500 crore in one or more tranches in such form on such terms…the number of equity shares and or fully/partly convertible or non/convertible debentures…provided the issue price of equity shares to be issued on conversion of debentures or upon exercising the rights of entitlement…determined by the board."
Moneylife has earlier reported about financial irregularities in the acquisition of vMoksha by H&M. The battle started in 2005, when H&M announced a $19 million buyout of vMoksha, co-founded by Rajeev Sawhney and Pawan Kumar (former CEO of the controversial DSQ Software). Mr Sawhney put in the money and Mr Kumar managed the operations. (Read, Helios & Matheson under the scanner, )
IDBI Federal Wealthsurance Premier Insurance Plan is a single premium ULIP designed keeping in mind specific requirements of the HNI class
Seeking to target high net worth customers, private insurer IDBI Federal Life insurance has launch its wealth-building plan, IDBI Federal Wealthsurance Premier Insurance Plan.
The product is a single premium ULIP, with a wide array of investment funds and protection benefits bundled in a low charge structure aimed to deliver one of the best-in-class returns in this category.
GV Nageswara Rao, MD and CEO of IDBI Federal Life Insurance, said: "Wealthsurance Premier is a great combination of a wealth and protection plan that assists the customers in wealth creation and management in the long term. With Wealthsurance Premier, we have customised the product to suit the HNIs by making it a single premium plan that allows one to build wealth for the long term in tranches, with the flexibility of 13 varied investment fund options across the risk-return continuum for active wealth management."
Wealthsurance Premier can insure HNI's wealth plan against death, 13 accidental injuries, 17 major diseases, and serious illnesses requiring hospitalisation or disablement which prevents engaging in an income-earning activity."
IDBI Federal Wealthsurance Premier Insurance Plan is a single premium ULIP designed keeping in mind specific requirements of the HNI class. With a minimum investment option of Rs5 lakh and top-ups at Rs10,000, the plan has low and level charges. There is no policy administration and allocation charges for premiums above Rs25 lakh. The minimum policy term is for 5 years and maximum of 75 years less the age of entry.
To illustrate, at a gross rate of 10% return, due to one of the lowest charges Wealthsurance Premier can deliver 8.53% IRR (without considering mortality charges and service tax) and an IRR of 7.83% (after considering mortality charges and service tax for a Rs1.25 crore insurance cover) for a Rs25 lakh premium for a term of 15 years.
Wealthsurance Premier offers a wide range of investment options like assured returns, variable returns linked to market performance or returns linked to equity market but with protection of capital. Also, tax benefits are availed on the contributions, returns and benefits under sections 80C and 10(10D). In effect, Wealthsurance Premier is a tax-free wealth management account as money put into it grows without any tax. One can also look at this product for gifting a life time of savings to children or grand children.
The Supreme Court is irked as the probe into black money is currently centred only around Pune-based stud farm owner Hassan Ali Khan. It has directed the government to it to track the more "serious" aspect of source of money by incorporating the angle of national security
New Delhi: The Supreme Court today flayed the government for focussing its probe only around Pune stud owner Hassan Ali Khan in the black money case and directed it to track the more "serious" aspect of source of money by incorporating the angle of national security, reports PTI.
"No further information is forthcoming from you. The whole concentration is focussed only on one individual. What about others?" a bench of justices B Sudershan Reddy and SS Nijjar asked.
"We would like to know what progress has been made by you in each case (relating to black money). We would also like to know from you on the next hearing the progress made in the investigation from the national security aspect and what is the source of such money which is a more serious aspect," it said.
The bench, which perused the 14-page status report (submitted in a sealed cover) on the probe by the Enforcement Directorate (ED), expressed shock over the revelation made in the report in which the name of a "power broker" was mentioned.
"It is very difficult to be calm and quiet after seeing the status report," the judges remarked.
The government, which has been facing a tough time in the apex court on the issue of black money, said there has been "substantial breakthrough" in the investigation.
It expressed concern over the security threat being faced by the investigators by telling the bench that there was a need for providing protection to all the officers of the ED involved in the case.
Solicitor General Gopal Subramaniam said he cannot disclose the names of officers involved in the probe. He said the government has also taken seriously the statements of 53-year-old Mr Khan who has expressed threat to his life and his family members.
He said the probe into the case of Mr Khan has revealed that it was not simply a case of forgery of passport but a case with far more serious implications.
"This is not simply a forgery of passport. It is a case with far more implications. Why did the passport disappear," Mr Subramaniam said while replying in the affirmative that another person, a Kolkata-based businessman Kashinath Tapuria, who was associated with Mr Khan, has been arrested.
"Why all these agencies were sleeping since 2008? Why it moved when we stepped in? If a writ petition had not been filed, nothing would have happened," the bench observed after the Solicitor General made submissions in the case lodged against Mr Khan in 2008.
Besides the ED probe, Mr Khan is also facing a nearly Rs70,000 crore tax demand notice from the Income Tax Department.
The bench also wanted to know why the government was claiming privilege and not favouring to disclose the names of the persons which have surfaced during the course of the probe.
"Tell us why are you are claiming privilege. Why not they (names of people) be disclosed. Let the people of the country know what is happening. Now there is no privilege on one name (Hassan Ali Khan). People have come to know everything," the bench said.
Mr Khan's counsel and senior advocate UU Lalit said, "He (Mr Khan) has been made a scapegoat."
The court reiterated its idea of setting up a Special Investigation Team (SIT) comprising officers of the Intelligence Bureau, Research and Analysis Wing, Central Bureau of Investigation and Enforcement Directorate to probe the entire issue related to the black money stashed away in banks abroad.
However, the Solicitor General said it would be too early to consider setting up of an SIT and sought one more chance to satisfy the court about the progress of investigation.
"At this juncture wait for another status report. Look at another status report and see what area can be bifurcated among different agencies," he told the bench which accepted his plea.
Mr Subramaniam said in probing the issue of black money, the sole consideration is the public interest and impending aspect of national security.
The court was hearing a PIL seeking retrieval of black money stashed away by Indian citizens in banks abroad. The PIL had been filed by former Union law minister Ram Jethmalani.
During the last hearing on 18th March, too, the apex court had toyed with the idea of forming an SIT to probe the malady of Indian black money in foreign banks and had asked the Centre to come up with its take on possible composition of such a team.
"In principle, do you have any objection to setting up of an SIT to look into the matter?" the bench had asked the government, while observing, "We are not talking about one case but many cases are involved in it. This is much wider."