Earlier, Mr. Suphanan acting on behalf of IFEC sent a letter requesting the DBD to reveiw its order denying the registration of Mr. Wiphu Maharakkhaka and Mr. Manusak Deawwanich on IFEC directors’ list and then may exercise the right to appeal such DBD’s decision.According to Section 42 of the Administrative Procedure Act B.E. 2539 (1996), an administrative order shall be effective since the person concerned is notified and shall remain in effect until it is revoked or invalid for other re...
Facebook Page, "สำนักงาน กลต.," on 24 November 2023.The award-winning teams are as follows: Student Category1. Grand Prize Winner: “The UNIQUE”2. 1st Runner-up: “UGBN”3. 2nd Runner-up: “ลูกชิ้นของฉัน”4
(Public Organization) (DGA) on 6 December 2023. The Digital Government Awards recognize the digital transformation excellence of governmental organizations. This year, the SEC received the Runner-up Award
directed TIES to rectify its 2014 financial statements due to the auditor?s qualified opinion in relation to the construction cost reports for construction contracts not prepared in accordance with its
not lose the money if making investment decision on the advice. Furthermore, {A} failed to immediately submit orders to close out derivatives positions as directed by the client, causing the client to
accessibility. A concerted effort was also directed towards elevating investor awareness and education in the realm of bond investment. The overarching aim was to strengthen the credibility of the Thai bond
statements. Accordingly, TIES must submit to the SEC and publicly disclose the financial statements, urgently. Earlier, the SEC had directed TIES to rectify its 2014 financial statements due to the auditor’s
. However, Mr. Suphanan failed to perform his duty as directed and submitted a clarification letter to the SEC. The SEC considered his explanation inadmissible. The SEC has viewed that Mr. Suphanan’s
orders from such client. They just submitted trading orders as directed by {A}. Furthermore, they had never conducted KYC/CDD for the client because {A} prohibited them from doing so. Also, {B} received
application by using the name and signature of a friend of hers. In case of {B}, the SEC directed KTB Securities to conduct further probe into the case. As Panadda previously claimed, {B} admitted that she