Please send your relevant information and company/bank details by email to be listed on this website free
Bookmark this page
| || |
Find A Drug Rehab mountainviewrecovery
Deals, discount sales websites
One of greatest financial frauds of the well paid GREEDY ntro/raw/cbi employees is how they are justifying the financial fraud, falsely claiming that they are doing a great favor allowing the domain investor to use .in domains. The domain investor has invested in domains of every tld, she has far more .com,.net and .org domains. Most of .in domains were registered in 2007 when the domain investor was not aware of cbi's .in rule , after that she has not registered many .in domains.
The domains are not free,the domain investor is paying the registry a fee every year, which the ntro/raw/cbi employees refuse to pay. There are many webmasters who use the .in domains, and ntro/raw/cbi employees do not falsely claim to own their domains, websites, they are only targetting the domain investor, online publisher, single woman engineer, owning this website, mainly because she is from a poor, powerless community and has no one to help or defend her against the cbi criminal defamation/financial fraud.
If ntro/cbi/raw feel that the domains should be owned by their lazy greedy fraud employees, they should pay the market price and purchase the domains legally,get them transferred to their name. The domain investor has sold many of her domains to domain investors worldwide, and there is no reason why the ntro/raw/cbi employees should be allowed to falsely claim ownership of the domains of a private citizen, when they have refused to pay the market price for 11 years since 2010. The domains do not make much money, so the financial fraud of the well paid ntro/raw/cbi employees is not justified.
The domain investor has not been contacted directly by any ntro/raw/cbi employee so there is no barter, since the domain investor has never given any consent, though some ntro/raw employees who hate her like tushar parekh, vijay, j srinivasan, puneet are misusing her name, falsely claiming to act on her behalf,when they have never contacted her, and this can be legally proved.
While all bank transactions are closely monitored with rules clearly defined, the same is not true for online barter. There are a large number of websites which offer users payment just for sending SMSes, playing games and other activities. Most of these websites do not allow users to transfer the balance in their account to the bank account, they offer mobile recharges.
So how is this barter accounted for?
There are many virtual currencies and wallets available today.
It is not possible to withdraw the balance in these wallets to the Indian bank account as these wallets do not have a provision.
So how is this barter accounted for? There are no clearly defined rules