<?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>2021 (11) TMI 457 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=414676</link>
    <description>The SC overturned the judgments of the trial court and HC, affirming the complaint&#039;s proper institution under the NI Act. The respondent, unable to rebut the presumption of financial liability, was sentenced to one year of imprisonment and fined twice the cheque amount. The sentence could be suspended if an additional Rs. 1,60,000/- was paid to the appellant within two months. The appeal was allowed, and costs were awarded to the appellant.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 10 Nov 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 22 Feb 2024 16:36:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=661086" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2021 (11) TMI 457 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=414676</link>
      <description>The SC overturned the judgments of the trial court and HC, affirming the complaint&#039;s proper institution under the NI Act. The respondent, unable to rebut the presumption of financial liability, was sentenced to one year of imprisonment and fined twice the cheque amount. The sentence could be suspended if an additional Rs. 1,60,000/- was paid to the appellant within two months. The appeal was allowed, and costs were awarded to the appellant.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 10 Nov 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=414676</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>