Mumbai: The Maharashtra Real Estate Appellate Tribunal (MREAT) has dismissed an appeal filed by Andheri-based Rushi Builders and Developers, directing the firm to refund Rs 7.76 lakh and pay an additional Rs 5 lakh as compensation for car parking to homebuyer Rekha Gamaprasad Yadav.
The tribunal held the developer accountable for failing to deliver on promises related to flat possession and parking space in the “Shivbliss” housing project.
Yadav and her co-buyer had booked flats 701 and 702 in the project, signing a registered agreement on June 29, 2017, for Rs 1.37 crore. Despite paying a total of Rs 1.45 crore—including Rs 5 lakh specifically for parking and Rs 7.57 lakh towards VAT and service tax before the implementation of GST—the developer failed to hand over possession of the flats by the promised deadline of December 2017.
Advocate Nilesh Gala who was appearing on behalf of Yadav argued that the promoter’s claim for GST and interest is baseless and misconceived. He pointed out that the promoter failed to issue a GST invoice as mandated under the GST Act.
“Records clearly show that the promoter had already collected Rs. 7,57,488 towards VAT and Service Tax from the allottee in June 2017—prior to the implementation of GST on July 1, 2017. As such, the allottee is not liable to pay GST on the transaction, and the promoter’s demand for Rs. 8,95,212 as GST is unjustified. He further clarified that the Anti-Profiteering complaint pending before the National Anti-Profiteering Authority pertains to a different relief and does not affect the tribunal’s jurisdiction in determining the illegality of GST collection in this matter. Supporting this, a report from the empanelled Chartered Accountant K.S. Sanghavi & Co. confirmed that GST was not applicable, and the promoter cannot charge interest on a non-payable GST amount.”
The tribunal rejected the promoter’s claims regarding jurisdictional errors, challenges to the authenticity of recorded conversations, and the legality of GST demands. It upheld the finding that the homebuyer had already paid indirect taxes before the rollout of GST and that the subsequent demand of Rs 8.95 lakh as GST was unwarranted.
MREAT concluded that delays caused by slum rehabilitation-related litigations and project approvals could not be used as a shield to deny relief to the homebuyer, especially when such delays were not attributable to her.
Quoting from its order, the tribunal stated: “The date specified in the agreement for sale is sacrosanct. If the delay is not attributable to the allottees/homebuyers, they are entitled to claim reliefs provided under Section 18 of the RERA Act.”
The Tribunal in its orders have thus asked the developer to refund of Rs 7,76,322 within 30 days, failing which interest will accrue at SBI’s highest MCLR + 2%. Further the developer have been asked to make a payment of Rs 5 lakh towards parking compensation, along with Rs 10,000 to be paid towards litigation costs.
