<?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>High Court Reviews Accused&#039;s Duty to Explain Blank Cheque in Section 138 Bounced Cheque Case.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=33222</link>
    <description>Offence under Section 138 NI Act - Cheque bounce - The accused also did not explain as to why the cheque allegedly given to Manoj Kumar was, firstly, given in blank i.e. without name and, secondly, why it was not taken back at the time of repayment of the loan to Manoj Kumar - HC</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2017 08:41:24 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2017 08:41:24 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=458156" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>High Court Reviews Accused&#039;s Duty to Explain Blank Cheque in Section 138 Bounced Cheque Case.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=33222</link>
      <description>Offence under Section 138 NI Act - Cheque bounce - The accused also did not explain as to why the cheque allegedly given to Manoj Kumar was, firstly, given in blank i.e. without name and, secondly, why it was not taken back at the time of repayment of the loan to Manoj Kumar - HC</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2017 08:41:24 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=33222</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>