specified corporate entity. Therefore, the requirement of having reasons to believe for issuing a notice under Section 34 of the Income Tax Act, 1922 (as it was earlier), would have to be the formation of a believe with reasons for an enquiry against such specified individual, Hindu undivided family or corporate. The enquiries specific does not involve any other person or entity for that given particular enquiry. On the other hand, the SEBI Act, 1992 was enacted to provide for the establishment of a Board to protect the interest of investors, insecurities and to promote the development and regulate the securities market and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto as held by the Supreme Court in the case of Clariant International Ltd. Vs. Securities and Exchange Board of India reported in (2004) 8 SCC 524. In other words, the SEBI Act, 1992 is for regulating and promoting the securities market as a whole. In the circumstance, any enquiry that may be required to be made under the SEBI Act, 1992, would be of a broader compass than that of an enquiry to be made under the Income Tax Act either of 1922 or 1961. Correspondingly, the requirement of having a reasonable ground to believe for initiating an enquiry under Section 11C of the SEBI Act, 1992 would also have to be on the basis of a broader spectrum as regards the activities that the SEBI is required to regulate, promote or develop.
