https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=161232 SC ruled that HUDA's forfeiture of earnest money deposit was unjustified. The respondent's communication of non-acceptance, though received after 30 days, was effectively sent within the stipulated period, considering postal holidays and office closures. Applying Section 10 of the General Clauses Act, the Court held that external circumstances preventing timely receipt should not penalize the respondent. The earnest money was to be refunded with 9% interest from the date of communication receipt. en-us Mon, 22 Nov 2004 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 15 May 2025 13:22:13 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=161232 SC ruled that HUDA's forfeiture of earnest money deposit was unjustified. The respondent's communication of non-acceptance, though received after 30 days, was effectively sent within the stipulated period, considering postal holidays and office closures. Applying Section 10 of the General Clauses Act, the Court held that external circumstances preventing timely receipt should not penalize the respondent. The earnest money was to be refunded with 9% interest from the date of communication receipt. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 22 Nov 2004 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=161232