<?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>2018 (11) TMI 1094 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=370751</link>
    <description>The High Court dismissed the criminal revision and confirmed the judgments of the lower courts in a case involving the confirmation of Sentence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The Revision Petitioner&#039;s failure to rebut statutory presumptions and provide evidence of full payment of sale consideration resulted in upholding the guilt under Section 138 of the Act. The courts found discrepancies in the sale consideration amount and lack of evidence to support the claim, leading to the rejection of the Revision Petitioner&#039;s defense. Compliance with statutory requirements under Section 138(a-c) of the Act was confirmed before the institution of the complaint.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 08 Oct 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 23 Nov 2018 09:35:42 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=543362" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (11) TMI 1094 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=370751</link>
      <description>The High Court dismissed the criminal revision and confirmed the judgments of the lower courts in a case involving the confirmation of Sentence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The Revision Petitioner&#039;s failure to rebut statutory presumptions and provide evidence of full payment of sale consideration resulted in upholding the guilt under Section 138 of the Act. The courts found discrepancies in the sale consideration amount and lack of evidence to support the claim, leading to the rejection of the Revision Petitioner&#039;s defense. Compliance with statutory requirements under Section 138(a-c) of the Act was confirmed before the institution of the complaint.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 08 Oct 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=370751</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>