Company: ZCARW
Filing Date: 2025-03-28
Form Type: DRS
Source: 0001013762-25-003498
Chunk: 161

Company: Zoomcar Holdings, Inc.
Filing Date: 2025-03-28
Form: DRS
Chunk 161
---
 The Company has taken necessary steps, including filing appeals, submissions, and deposits, and is awaiting  
 further communication from the authorities. In relation to the GST demands on gross booking value, the Company has filed a writ petition     
 with various authorities challenging the order. Based on the submissions provided and documents available, management believes that no       
 significant outflow is expected, and therefore, no provision has been recorded as of December 31, 2024, and March 31, 2024.                  |

| (C) | In February 2023, a former employee of Zoomcar India instituted                                                                          
 a suit before the City Civil and Sessions Judge at Mayo Hall, Bengaluru against Zoomcar India, Zoomcar, Inc. and Zoomcar Holdings, Inc.  
 (formerly IOAC) challenging his termination, claiming damages amounting to $396,457 and claiming that 100,000 options to purchase shares 
 of Zoomcar, Inc. have vested. On March 3, 2023, the City Civil and Sessions Judge at Mayo Hall, Bengaluru, issued an interim injunction  
 to restrain each of Zoomcar, Inc. and Zoomcar Holdings, Inc. from “alienating or dealing” the 100,000 shares of Zoomcar,                 
 Inc. claimed by the former employee while the suit is pending. Zoomcar believes that such claims are baseless and is attempting to have  
 the interim order vacated. In addition, Zoomcar India filed an application in the former employee’s suit, seeking that Zoomcar           
 Holdings, Inc. be deleted from the array of parties in the suit.                                                                         |

| (D) | On January 30, 2024, the Company                                                                                                              
 received a statement of arbitration claims involving warrant holders seeking damages of at least $10,000,000 purportedly arising from         
 the alleged breaches of certain agreements between the Company and warrant holders. Additionally, the Claim requests additional amounts       
 for attorneys’ fees and costs, as well as an order of rescission regarding the issuance of certain allegedly wrongfully dilutive              
 shares of the Company’s stock issued in connection with the business combination or, alternatively, an order mandating a purportedly          
 anti-dilutive issuance of additional shares of Zoomcar common stock to the warrant holders. The Court denied the temporary injunctive         
 relief and passed an order to prevent issuance of securities to insiders and allowing Claimants to attach Company’s assets up to              
 $3,500,000 if, and only if, located in New York. No