SEBI censures Alankit Assignments in RTA compliance order

The Enforcement Action

The Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) has issued a regulatory censure to Alankit Assignments Limited, one of the market's registered Registrar and Share Transfer Agents (RTAs), closing a long-running enquiry into the intermediary's record-keeping and processing standards. The action was taken by whole-time member Amarjeet Singh under order number WTM/AS/MIRSD/MIRSD-SEC-6/32657/2026-27, published on the SEBI website on 12 August 2026.

Alankit Assignments (PAN AAACA9483E) holds SEBI registration INR000002532 and operates as a Qualified Registrar and Transfer Agent (QRTA), the category reserved for the largest RTAs handling folios across many listed companies. Per the order, the proceedings flowed from an Enquiry Report dated 28 February 2025 submitted by a Designated Authority, which itself followed a SEBI inspection of the firm covering 1 April 2021 to 19 September 2022.

Crucially, this is a regulatory censure, not a ban or a fresh monetary penalty. SEBI's Designated Authority had recommended that the firm be prohibited from taking on any new clients or assignments as an RTA for one year, alongside the censure. The whole-time member declined the prohibition, holding it would be "harsh and disproportionate" given that a separate adjudication had already imposed a penalty of Rs 10 lakh on the firm for the same set of findings. Alankit had submitted that most of the lapses were "technical and venial in nature" and had been rectified; SEBI recorded that response in the order.

How the Scheme Worked

This is a compliance-standards matter rather than a case of alleged siphoning, and the order should be read that way. What the inspection documented was a cluster of operational failures in how an RTA is required to safeguard shareholder records and process investor requests. SEBI's order sets them out across thirteen heads of alleged violation, established after the enquiry.

According to the order, 39 associated persons engaged by the firm held no NISM certification at all during the inspection period, and a further 10 did not hold a valid certification. NISM certification is the mandatory competence requirement for personnel handling securities-market functions, so the finding goes to the qualification of staff processing investor requests. The order also records that the firm did not execute the required tripartite agreements with seven companies, the contracts that bind issuer, RTA and depository to agreed service standards.

The record-integrity findings are the most investor-facing. The order states the firm did not have signature cards for 46 per cent of physical folios examined, with no signature card for more than 90 per cent of folios across 67 client companies and none at all for folios of 40 companies. Signature cards are the primary control an RTA uses to verify that a person requesting a transfer, transmission or duplicate certificate is the genuine shareholder. The order also notes delays in 123 of 2,026 requests for issuance of duplicate shares, and, in one instance (Folio No. 13346), that a duplicate share certificate was issued to a person other than the original shareholder where altered PAN, Aadhaar and bank documents had been submitted.

The order further details 54 dematerialisation requests processed beyond the stipulated 15-day window, address changes made in four folios without any request from the shareholder, an address-change request that was not processed despite being made, and physical transfer requests processed after the 1 April 2019 cut-off after which physical transfers were barred. The procedural history is set out in full: the Designated Authority's show-cause notice of 10 July 2024, the firm's reply of 24 January 2025, a personal hearing, the Enquiry Report of 28 February 2025, a further show-cause notice dated 3 April 2025 forwarding the report, a hearing on 4 December 2025, and post-hearing written submissions.

The Law Invoked

The operative order was passed under Section 12(3) of the SEBI Act, 1992, read with Section 19 of that Act and Regulation 27(5) of the SEBI (Intermediaries) Regulations, 2008. Section 12(3) is the provision that empowers SEBI to suspend, cancel or otherwise act against a registered intermediary's certificate; Regulation 27 governs how the Board passes final orders after an enquiry report.

The underlying violations, as tabulated in the order, were framed against the SEBI (Registrars to an Issue and Share Transfer Agents) Regulations, 1993, principally Regulation 13 read with the code of conduct in Schedule III, and Regulation 9A on tripartite agreements. Staff-certification failures were framed under Regulations 3, 6, 9 and 10 of the SEBI (Certification of Associated Persons in the Securities Market) Regulations, 2007. Several processing lapses were framed under the SEBI (Listing Obligations and Disclosure Requirements) Regulations, 2015, including Regulation 40 on transfer of securities and Regulation 7(4) on the RTA agreement, alongside a series of SEBI operational circulars. In plain terms, these provisions set the competence, contracting and record-keeping standards an RTA must meet so that a shareholder's holdings cannot be altered without proper verification.

What Happens Next

A regulatory censure is a formal caution on record; it does not by itself restrict Alankit's registration or its ability to service existing or new clients. SEBI noted that the firm had demonstrated a "measurable trajectory of improvement" across successive inspections and that no demonstrable loss to any investor had been established as a consequence of the violations. The censure directs the firm to be careful in future in complying with the RTA framework.

Like any order of a SEBI whole-time member, this order is appealable to the Securities Appellate Tribunal (SAT) under Section 15T of the SEBI Act, and from there, on a question of law, to the Supreme Court. Nothing on the public record indicates the firm intends to appeal, which would be unusual given that the outcome was the lighter of the two measures on the table. The separate Rs 10 lakh adjudication penalty referenced in the order arose from the same inspection findings and was dealt with in its own proceeding.

What It Means

For ordinary investors, the value in this order is not the censure itself but the checklist of controls it exposes. An RTA is the entity that actually moves your shares when you seek a transmission after a death in the family, a duplicate certificate for lost paper shares, or a dematerialisation of physical holdings. The controls SEBI found wanting here, signature verification, staff certification and timely processing, are precisely the ones that stand between a genuine shareholder and a wrongful transfer.

The practical takeaway is to use the tools SEBI provides. Every investor can confirm which RTA services a company through the company's website or the stock exchange, and can verify an intermediary's registration status on the SEBI website. Holders of physical shares should complete their PAN, KYC and nomination updates (Form ISR-1 and related forms) so that their folios carry current, verifiable records, since missing signature cards and outdated details are exactly what create room for error. If a request is delayed beyond the prescribed timeline, the SCORES portal is the formal channel for a complaint against an RTA. The order is a reminder that intermediary supervision, not investor vigilance alone, is doing quiet work in the background.

FAQ

What exactly did SEBI order against Alankit Assignments?

SEBI's whole-time member issued a regulatory censure, a formal caution on record, under Section 12(3) of the SEBI Act read with Regulation 27(5) of the Intermediaries Regulations. SEBI declined to impose the one-year prohibition on new clients that its Designated Authority had recommended, citing proportionality and a Rs 10 lakh penalty already levied for the same findings.

Was Alankit found to have defrauded investors?

No. SEBI expressly recorded that none of the established violations involved fraud, deliberate misrepresentation or a wilful attempt to circumvent requirements, and that no demonstrable investor loss had been established. The findings are operational and compliance failures in record-keeping and processing, established after an enquiry, not findings of fraud.

Can the order be appealed?

Yes. An order of a SEBI whole-time member can be challenged before the Securities Appellate Tribunal (SAT) under Section 15T of the SEBI Act, with a further appeal on questions of law to the Supreme Court. The public record does not indicate whether the firm intends to appeal.

How can I check that my company's registrar is properly registered?

You can verify a registrar's SEBI registration number and status on the SEBI website under recognised intermediaries, and confirm which RTA handles a particular company through the company's investor-relations page or the stock exchange. Alankit's RTA registration number, as stated in the order, is INR000002532.

What should shareholders do to protect their folios?

Keep folio records current: submit PAN, KYC, bank and nomination details for physical holdings, and dematerialise physical shares where possible. If an RTA delays a transmission, duplicate-issue or demat request beyond the prescribed timeline, raise it through the RTA's grievance channel and, if unresolved, on SEBI's SCORES portal.

Where can I read the official order?

The full order is published on SEBI's enforcement section and runs to 59 pages, setting out each head of violation, the firm's submissions and the whole-time member's reasoning. The link appears in the source note below.

This report is based on the SEBI whole-time member order in the matter of Alankit Assignments Limited, published on 12 August 2026 under reference WTM/AS/MIRSD/MIRSD-SEC-6/32657/2026-27.