No. Kshitij Venture Capital Fund is registered under the SEBI (Venture Capital Funds) Regulations, 1996, the regime that preceded the AIF Regulations, 2012. Funds registered under the 1996 rules continue to be governed by them until they wind up, so SEBI still enforces those rules alongside the AIF Regulations.

What was the alleged violation?

Regulation 23(1)(a) read with regulation 24(2) of the VCF Regulations, 1996, which govern the term of a scheme and its winding up. The order describes the fund as having wound up the scheme with a delay of four years and eight months, between September 2013 and May 2018.

Does a settlement order decide whether the violation happened?

No. A settlement under the SEBI (Settlement Proceedings) Regulations, 2018 disposes of proceedings that may be initiated without adjudicating them. The order says SEBI shall not initiate enforcement action for the violations concerned, and reserves SEBI's right to act if a representation is later found untrue, an undertaking is breached, or a discrepancy in the settlement terms emerges.

18 June 2026

SEBI settles a winding-up delay case over Kshitij Venture Capital Fund: the scheme ran four years and eight months past its close

What was the SEBI settlement in the Kshitij Venture Capital Fund matter?

SEBI observed prima facie that a Kshitij Venture Capital Fund scheme, whose term ended on 30 June 2013 after one permitted extension, was extended again instead of being wound up within three months, and that its last asset was liquidated only in May 2018. Everstone Capital Advisors Private Limited, the investment manager, settled the proceedings for ₹10,87,500 on 18 June 2026.

What happened

SEBI passed a summary settlement order on 18 June 2026, reference SO/2026-27/PSD/13, signed by whole time members K.V.R. Murty and Kamlesh C. Varshney. The applicant was Everstone Capital Advisors Private Limited, the investment manager of Kshitij Venture Capital Fund.

The fund is a venture capital fund registered under the SEBI (Venture Capital Funds) Regulations, 1996, not an AIF under the 2012 regime. Funds registered under the older rules stay with those rules until they wind up, which is why an order about a 2005 scheme lands in 2026.

The timeline SEBI set out

Date	Event
30 June 2005	Scheme term begins, seven years
30 June 2012	Original term ends
30 June 2013	Term ends after the one permitted extension
30 September 2013	Three-month winding-up window closes
30 June 2014	Term extended again instead
May 2018	Last asset of the scheme liquidated
23 February 2024	Final distribution to investors

The scheme's term was seven years, extendable by one year on the recommendation of the trustee or investment advisor. That extension was taken. Rather than wind up within three months of the extended term ending, the scheme was extended a second time.

SEBI's characterisation is that the fund wound up the scheme with a delay of four years and eight months, from September 2013 to May 2018, in violation of regulation 23(1)(a) read with regulation 24(2) of the VCF Regulations. As investment manager responsible for day-to-day management, Everstone Capital Advisors was alleged to be in violation of the same provisions.

When the last asset was liquidated, proceeds were distributed after ₹3 crore was set aside for liabilities, contingencies and expenses. The order records that the final distribution to investors followed the settlement of tax litigation in the Bombay High Court, on 23 February 2024.

How it was settled

SEBI issued a Notice of Summary Settlement on 17 March 2026, offering settlement on remittance of ₹10,87,500 within 30 days. Everstone Capital Advisors remitted on 10 April 2026 and filed its application on 16 April 2026. SEBI confirmed credit.

Under section 15JB of the SEBI Act read with regulation 23 of the Settlement Regulations, the proceedings are settled: SEBI will not initiate enforcement action for those violations, without prejudice to its powers under regulations 28 and 31.

Why it matters beyond this fund

A close-ended fund that cannot sell its last holdings does not stop being subject to its own term. The gap between when a scheme is due to end and when its assets are actually saleable is the practical problem underneath the whole winding-up question, and it is what SEBI addressed for AIFs two days before this order, in its 16 June 2026 guidelines on retention of proceeds and inoperative-fund status, which followed a consultation earlier in the year.

What is not settled

Nothing here determines that the violation occurred. A summary settlement disposes of proceedings without adjudication, and the order says so on its face.

Sources

Summary Settlement Order in the matter of Kshitij Venture Capital Fund — SO/2026-27/PSD/13 — SEBI, 18 June 2026 · primary
Settlement Order, full text, 3 pages — SEBI, 18 June 2026 · primary

Dated 18 June 2026, last checked against source 26 August 2026. The dateline is the date of the instrument this item reports, not the date the page was written. This page reports what a document says. It is information, not legal, tax or investment advice, and it is not a recommendation about any fund.

All news · Regulation · Glossary · Fund directory