Kalpataru Limited Amends Code of Practices for Fair Disclosure of Unpublished Price Sensitive Information

3 min read     Updated on 13 May 2026, 08:00 PM
scanx
Reviewed by
Shriram SScanX News Team
AI Summary

Kalpataru Limited's Board of Directors approved amendments to its Fair Disclosure Policy on May 12, 2026, under Regulation 8 of SEBI PIT Regulations, 2015. The policy, originally adopted on August 02, 2024, now reflects its first revision and governs the timely, uniform, and universal disclosure of Unpublished Price Sensitive Information. The revised framework outlines the roles of the Chief Investor Relations Officer, principles of fair disclosure, legitimate purpose exceptions, and requirements for maintaining a Structured Digital Database. The amended policy has been filed with the stock exchanges and published on the company's official website.

powered bylight_fuzz_icon
40228204

*this image is generated using AI for illustrative purposes only.

The Board of Directors of Kalpataru Limited , at its meeting held on Tuesday, May 12, 2026, approved amendments to the Code of Practices and Procedures for Fair Disclosure of Unpublished Price Sensitive Information (the 'Fair Disclosure Policy'). The amendment was made pursuant to Regulation 8 read with Schedule A of the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Prohibition of Insider Trading) Regulations, 2015 ('PIT Regulations'). The amended policy has been intimated to the stock exchanges and is also available on the company's official website at https://www.kalpataru.com/investor-corner .

Policy Revision Details

The Fair Disclosure Policy was originally adopted on August 02, 2024, and the amendments approved on May 12, 2026 constitute its first revision. The key details of the policy revision are summarised below:

Parameter: Details
Date of Adoption: August 02, 2024
First Revision: May 12, 2026
Regulatory Reference: Regulation 8 of SEBI PIT Regulations, 2015
Authorising Body: Board of Directors
Compliance Officer: Gajendra Mewara, Company Secretary & Compliance Officer

Key Principles of the Fair Disclosure Policy

The amended policy sets out the following core principles governing the disclosure of Unpublished Price Sensitive Information (UPSI):

  • Timely and adequate public disclosure of all credible and concrete UPSI as soon as such information comes into being
  • Uniform and universal dissemination of UPSI to avoid selective disclosure
  • Prompt dissemination of UPSI that gets disclosed selectively, inadvertently or otherwise
  • Appropriate, fair, and prompt response to queries on news reports and requests for verification of market rumours by regulatory authorities
  • Ensuring that information shared with analysts and research personnel is not UPSI
  • Publishing transcripts or records of proceedings of meetings with analysts and other investor relations conferences on the official website
  • Handling UPSI on a need-to-know basis

Oversight and Disclosure Coordination

Under the revised policy, the Board of Directors is required to designate a senior officer as the Chief Investor Relations Officer (CIRO), who will report to the Chief Financial Officer or Managing Director. The CIRO is responsible for ensuring timely, adequate, uniform, and universal dissemination of UPSI to stock exchanges, analysts, shareholders, and media. Disclosure or dissemination of UPSI is to be approved in advance by the CIRO, who may consult the Managing Director, Executive Director(s), or the Chief Financial Officer in cases of doubt.

In instances where UPSI is accidentally disclosed without prior approval, the person responsible is required to immediately inform the CIRO, who will then promptly disseminate the information to make it generally available.

Legitimate Purpose Framework

The policy includes a dedicated framework for determining Legitimate Purposes under which UPSI may be shared. Sharing of UPSI is permitted in the ordinary course of business with partners, collaborators, lenders, customers, suppliers, merchant bankers, legal advisors, auditors, insolvency professionals, or other advisors or consultants, provided such sharing is not undertaken to evade or circumvent regulatory prohibitions. Any person receiving UPSI pursuant to a legitimate purpose is classified as an insider and is required to maintain confidentiality in compliance with SEBI PIT Regulations.

Structured Digital Database

The policy mandates that the Board of Directors ensure the maintenance of a Structured Digital Database containing the nature of UPSI, the names of persons who have shared the information, and the names of persons with whom the information has been shared, along with their Permanent Account Number (PAN) or any other identifier authorised by law. The database must be maintained internally with adequate controls, including time stamping and audit trails to ensure non-tamperability. Information not originating from within the organisation must be entered into the database not later than 2 calendar days from receipt. The Compliance Officer is responsible for maintaining the database and providing notice to relevant persons or entities to maintain confidentiality of UPSI.

Historical Stock Returns for Kalpataru

1 Day5 Days1 Month6 Months1 Year5 Years
-4.03%-11.17%+9.30%-10.10%-23.56%-23.56%

How might the appointment of a Chief Investor Relations Officer at Kalpataru Limited influence the company's transparency and investor confidence compared to peers in the infrastructure sector?

Could the strengthened Structured Digital Database requirements and audit trail mandates expose Kalpataru Limited to greater regulatory scrutiny if historical UPSI handling practices are reviewed?

How might Kalpataru Limited's revised Fair Disclosure Policy impact its relationships with analysts, institutional investors, and lenders who regularly receive sensitive business information?

Kalpataru Subsidiary Ananta Landmarks Receives GST Appellate Order of Rs. 4,00,85,389

2 min read     Updated on 10 May 2026, 02:51 AM
scanx
Reviewed by
Naman SScanX News Team
AI Summary

Kalpataru Limited disclosed that its wholly owned subsidiary, Ananta Landmarks Private Limited (ALPL), received a GST appellate order dated May 8, 2026, imposing a net demand of Rs. 4,00,85,389 for FY 2021-22, reduced from the original demand of Rs. 5,48,78,704 following a partial allowance of ALPL's appeal. The order covers alleged violations including RCM liability, excess ITC claims, and differential tax on corporate guarantees, and is stated to have no material financial impact on Kalpataru Limited.

powered bylight_fuzz_icon
39860595

*this image is generated using AI for illustrative purposes only.

Kalpataru Limited has disclosed, under Regulation 30 of the SEBI (Listing Obligations and Disclosure Requirements) Regulations, 2015, that its wholly owned subsidiary, Ananta Landmarks Private Limited (ALPL), has received a GST appellate order dated May 8, 2026, from the Joint Commissioner of State Tax, Mumbai – App-F-0008. The order imposes a net GST demand of Rs. 4,00,85,389 (Rupees Four Crores Eighty-Five Thousand Three Hundred and Eighty-Nine only) for the period April 2021 to March 2022, inclusive of interest and penalty.

Background and Prior Disclosures

This development follows a series of earlier disclosures made by Kalpataru Limited regarding GST-related orders received by ALPL. The table below summarises the prior demands communicated to the stock exchanges:

Disclosure Dated: Period GST Demand (Rs.)
February 17, 2026 01/07/2017 to 31/03/2018 & 01/04/2018 to 31/03/2019 14,18,18,852
February 24, 2026 01/04/2019 to 31/03/2020 3,32,93,874

In the current matter, ALPL had originally received an order dated December 30, 2025, passed by the Deputy Commissioner of State Tax (MUM-AUD-E-0405), Mumbai, imposing a total GST demand of Rs. 5,48,78,704 (Rupees Five Crores Forty-Eight Lakhs Seventy-Eight Thousand Seven Hundred and Four Only) for FY 2021-22, inclusive of interest and penalty under the IGST Act, 2017, the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, and the State Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.

Appeal and Revised Order

ALPL filed an appeal on February 20, 2026 against the original order. The GST Appellate Authority has now partially allowed the appeal, reducing the demand to Rs. 4,00,85,389, under Section 107 of the CGST Act, 2017, and Section 20 of the IGST Act read with Section 107 of the CGST Act, 2017. The order was received by ALPL on May 8, 2026 at 2:29 p.m.

The key details of the appellate order are summarised below:

Parameter: Details
Entity: Ananta Landmarks Private Limited (ALPL)
Relation to Listed Entity: Wholly owned subsidiary of Kalpataru Limited
Authority: Joint Commissioner of State Tax, Mumbai – App-F-0008
Order Date: May 8, 2026
Period Covered: April 2021 to March 2022
Net GST Demand: Rs. 4,00,85,389 (inclusive of interest and penalty)
Original Demand: Rs. 5,48,78,704

Nature of Alleged Contraventions

The order pertains to the following alleged violations:

  • RCM Liability on services provided by Municipal Corporation
  • Excess claim of Input Tax Credit (ITC) in GSTR-3B on account of various reasons
  • Differential tax liability on corporate guarantee

Financial Impact and Next Steps

Kalpataru Limited has stated that this order does not have a material financial impact on the company. ALPL intends to file a further appeal against the order before the appropriate GST Appellate Tribunal. Based on the opinion of its legal advisors, ALPL is of the view that it has a strong case in the matter.

The disclosure was made in accordance with SEBI Master Circular HO/49/14/14(7)2025-CFD-POD2/I/3762/2026 dated January 30, 2026, read with Regulation 30 of the SEBI Listing Regulations. The information has also been simultaneously disseminated on the company's website.

Historical Stock Returns for Kalpataru

1 Day5 Days1 Month6 Months1 Year5 Years
-4.03%-11.17%+9.30%-10.10%-23.56%-23.56%

How might the cumulative GST demands across multiple financial years (FY2017-18 through FY2021-22) totaling over Rs. 22 crores impact Kalpataru Limited's consolidated financial position if the GST Appellate Tribunal rules against ALPL?

Given that ALPL has faced GST scrutiny across five consecutive financial years, could this signal a broader regulatory pattern that may affect other real estate developers with similar ITC claim structures?

What is the likely timeline for the GST Appellate Tribunal to hear ALPL's further appeal, and how could prolonged litigation uncertainty affect Kalpataru Limited's investor sentiment and credit ratings?

More News on Kalpataru

1 Year Returns:-23.56%