Shell cos clampdown: Sebi lifts curbs on Lotus Eye Hospital

Sebi today lifted trading curbs on Lotus Eye Hospital and Institute Ltd, which figured in the list of 'suspected shell companies', after finding that the firm did not indulge in any violations.
This is the first case where the regulator has revoked the restrictions and actions taken against a firm that was named among the 331 suspected shell companies.
Amid the continuing crackdown on shell companies that are allegedly being used as conduits for illicit fund flows, Sebi has already ordered forensic audit of at least four entities -- IRIS Mediaworks Ltd, Hit Kit Global Solutions Ltd, Kavit Industries Ltd and GV Films Ltd.

In an 11-page order, Sebi today said there is no evidence of misrepresentation or misuse of books of accounts by Lotus Eye Hospital.
"I do not find any evidence of misrepresentation by the company, misuse of the books of accounts / funds of the company or violation of LODR (Listing Obligation and Disclosure Requirements) Regulations," Sebi Whole Time Member Madhabi Puri Buch said in the order.
In view of no such evidence, Buch said she is of the considered view that "actions envisaged in Sebi's letter dated August 7, 2017 against Lotus Eye Hospital and Institute Ltd are liable to be revoked".

Lotus Eye Hospital is a going concern and has been in existence for the past 20 years. The firm had complied with LODR regulations, she added.

In a notice, BSE today said the scrip of Lotus Eye Hospital would be moved out from the Graded Surveillance Framework (GSM). These shares would be brought under 'T' category from September 14.
While the curbs were imposed on the 331 firms from August 8 onwards, they were eased with regard to some companies following appeals against the ruling.
In some instances, the Securities Appellate Tribunal asked the regulator to continue with its probe and pass orders expeditiously.

Sebi's move came after it received the list of 331 suspected shell companies from the government on June 9 and was asked to initiate necessary action.
The regulator found that the companies identified as shell companies were potentially involved in misrepresentation including of their financials and business in violation of listing regulations.
About these entities, the regulator said it was of the view that they were possibly misusing the books of accounts and funds of the companies including by facilitating "accommodation entries to the detriment of minority shareholders".