<?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>2015 (9) TMI 1068 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=264400</link>
    <description>The higher court set aside the trial court&#039;s judgment of acquittal and convicted the respondent under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The court found that the respondent failed to rebut the presumption under Sections 118 and 139, and criticized the trial court for misinterpreting the legality of the money lending business and income tax returns. The case was scheduled for sentencing at a later date.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 06 Mar 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 24 Sep 2015 09:55:53 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=398540" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (9) TMI 1068 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=264400</link>
      <description>The higher court set aside the trial court&#039;s judgment of acquittal and convicted the respondent under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The court found that the respondent failed to rebut the presumption under Sections 118 and 139, and criticized the trial court for misinterpreting the legality of the money lending business and income tax returns. The case was scheduled for sentencing at a later date.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 06 Mar 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=264400</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>