Transaction value rejection requires reliable corroboration; refundable VAT is excluded and temporary registration does not defeat new-vehicle exempti...
Page of 4803
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
381 to 400 of 96047 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The appellant's application seeking attachment of a flat in lieu of the mandatory pre-deposit u/s 43(5) of the RERA was dismissed. The court held that the appellant cannot claim benefit of the moratorium issued by the NCLT for an exemption from making the pre-deposit, as the insolvency resolution process pertains to a different project. The court upheld the requirement of pre-deposit as a precondition for hearing appeals under RERA, as affirmed by the Supreme Court, rejecting the appellant's offer of a flat as security. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed.
The appellant's application seeking attachment of a flat in lieu of the mandatory pre-deposit u/s 43(5) of the RERA was dismissed. The court held that the appellant cannot claim benefit of the moratorium issued by the NCLT for an exemption from making the pre-deposit, as the insolvency resolution process pertains to a different project. The court upheld the requirement of pre-deposit as a precondition for hearing appeals under RERA, as affirmed by the Supreme Court, rejecting the appellant's offer of a flat as security. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4803
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
