<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2014 (3) TMI 139 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=244682</link>
    <description>The Supreme Court held that the presentation of a cheque dated 31st December 2005 on 30th June 2006 was within the six-month validity period under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. The Court clarified that the term &quot;month&quot; should follow the British calendar, excluding the drawl date and including the last day. Consequently, the prosecution was not time-barred, and the appeal was dismissed, directing the trial court to expedite the case.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 18 Feb 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 05 Mar 2014 16:47:05 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=347881" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (3) TMI 139 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=244682</link>
      <description>The Supreme Court held that the presentation of a cheque dated 31st December 2005 on 30th June 2006 was within the six-month validity period under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. The Court clarified that the term &quot;month&quot; should follow the British calendar, excluding the drawl date and including the last day. Consequently, the prosecution was not time-barred, and the appeal was dismissed, directing the trial court to expedite the case.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 18 Feb 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=244682</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>