T.C.
\nSupreme<\/p>\n
Principal No: 2014\/19132
\nDecision No: 2015\/6993
\nK. Date: 12.5.2015<\/p>\n
At the end of the trial of the case for the cancellation of the appeal between the parties, the file was examined and considered upon appeal by the deputies of the party within the period of the sentence given for the rejection of the case due to reasons written in the decree.<\/p>\n
DECISION<\/p>\n
The attorney of the plaintiff said that the client company and the defendant company agreed on the sale of eight fields from the deed and that the invoice was issued for this sale, the client sent the defendant an invoice worth 214,760-TL and the defendant had no objection to this invoice, but the defendant party paid the amount specified in the invoice as 182,000-TL by cutting the 2013\/**** stating that they started execution proceedings from numbered file, the defendant stopped the proceedings on the objection, to the cancellation of the appeal, he demanded and sued for the continuation of the proceedings and for 20% execution denial compensation against the defendant.
\nThe defendant’s attorney demanded that his client and the plaintiff agree to purchase and sell 8 pieces of real estate for a price of 182,000-TL including VAT, and that the real estate was purchased from the deed with a price of 182,000-TL including VAT, and that the plaintiff’s demand for money under the name of VAT is not legal,
\nAs a result of the trial made by the court, the burden of proof that VAT will be paid by the defendant belongs to the plaintiff, the plaintiff cannot present any written evidence about it, the witness cannot be heard in accordance with HMK’s articles 200 and its sequel, K\u0131rklareli Land Registry Office’s official deed dated 23.12.2011 and numbered 12502, the real estate subject to the case was sold by the plaintiff to the defendant for a total amount of 182,000-TL, (Supreme Court 19. 03.11 Of The Law Department.Dated 2010 and 2010\/3127 E., 2010\/12338 K., Supreme Court 19. Of the law department dated 11.06.2013 and dated 2013\/8012 E., 2013\/10801 K. Numbered..) the sale price does not include VAT unless also stated that VAT is paid within the scope of this price together with the sale price is accepted, the plaintiff seller has sold the immovable property subject to lawsuit with title deed official certificates in cash and in advance against the cost of 182,000-TL, in the concrete case, the defendant has an acceptance that the buyer will pay VAT, since it could not be proved that the plaintiff was pursuing malice, it was decided that the defendant’s request for compensation was also refused and the sentence was appealed by the deputies of the parties.
\nOn the day of 12.05.2015, it was unanimously decided to reject all appeals made by the deputies of the party and to approve the provision in accordance with the procedure and law, and to obtain the following approval fees from the appellants, according to the articles in the file on the evidence based on the decision and the reasons necessary,<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
T.C. Supreme Principal No: 2014\/19132 Decision No: 2015\/6993 K. Date: 12.5.2015 At the end of the trial of the case for the cancellation of the appeal between the parties, the file was examined and considered upon appeal by the deputies of the party within the…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[1],"tags":[217,223,220,218,247,279],"yoast_head":"\n