<?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>2019 (9) TMI 391 - HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=385623</link>
    <description>The High Court allowed the appeal against the judgment of acquittal under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act. Emphasizing the statutory presumption in favor of the holder of the dishonored cheque, the court found the trial court&#039;s decision flawed due to improper appreciation of evidence. The acquittal was quashed, and the accused was directed to appear before the High Court for sentencing considerations.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 13 Aug 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 10 Sep 2019 06:04:13 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=586680" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (9) TMI 391 - HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=385623</link>
      <description>The High Court allowed the appeal against the judgment of acquittal under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act. Emphasizing the statutory presumption in favor of the holder of the dishonored cheque, the court found the trial court&#039;s decision flawed due to improper appreciation of evidence. The acquittal was quashed, and the accused was directed to appear before the High Court for sentencing considerations.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 13 Aug 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=385623</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>