SAT Sets Aside ₹35,400 BSE Fine On Calcom Vision Over Missing Audit Report Pages

The Securities Appellate Tribunal has set aside a ₹35,400 fine imposed by the Bombay Stock Exchange (BSE) on Calcom Vision Limited after two pages of its limited review reports were inadvertently omitted during scanning, accepting the company's explanation that the mistake was unintentional.

"The facts recorded herein persuade us to accept appellant Company's explanation that the non-filing two pages containing CA's signature and UDIN was due to bona fide inadvertence. In a case of this nature, in our view, a pragmatic approach must be adopted", the tribunal observed, noting that there was no dispute over the financial results and no allegation that the Chartered Accountant's firm had disowned its reports.

A bench comprising Presiding Officer Justice P.S. Dinesh Kumar and Technical Members Meera Swarup and Dr. Dheeraj Bhatnagar allowed the company's appeal against BSE's decision to reject its request for a waiver of the fine.

The fine was imposed for non-compliance with Regulation 33 of SEBI's Listing Obligations and Disclosure Requirements Regulations, 2015, for the quarter ended December 2024.

Calcom Vision filed its financial results on February 14, 2025, before the February 16 deadline. However, two pages of the accompanying limited review reports were inadvertently omitted during scanning. The company uploaded them on February 18, the same day BSE flagged the omission.

While the company maintained that the financial figures remained unchanged, BSE argued that the missing pages contained the Chartered Accountant's partner's signature and UDIN, needed to verify compliance.

It noted that the first page of each report carried the Chartered Accountant's partner's seal and initials, while the omitted continuation pages contained the partner's full signature and UDIN.

Accepting the company's explanation, the tribunal observed that the financial results were undisputed and there was no allegation that the Chartered Accountant's firm had disowned its reports.

“There is no dispute with regard to the financial results. There is no allegation that the Chartered Accountant firm has disowned its reports,” it observed.

The tribunal allowed the appeal and set aside the fine. It directed that the amount be refunded forthwith if the company had already deposited it. No costs were awarded.

For Appellant: Advocates Ravi Prakash and Nupur Singh

For Respondent: Advocates Sagar Divekar, Abhimanyu Mhapankar and Saumya Mishra