<?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>Settlement-cheque presumptions survive unsupported security and alteration defences, while individual circumstances may reduce substantive imprisonment.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=105521</link>
    <description>Admitted execution and delivery of settlement cheques trigger presumptions of consideration and legally enforceable debt; a security-cheque defence must provide a probable basis to displace them. Completion of particulars in a voluntarily delivered signed cheque differs from material alteration, which requires proof of an unauthorised change to an existing entry; a collecting-bank endorsement alone does not establish alteration. Additional defence evidence on appeal is not an unrestricted entitlement and may be refused when belated, unproved, or unnecessary. Compensation should realistically reflect the cheque amount and deprivation of payment. The conviction, compensation and default sentence remained, while substantive imprisonment was reduced to six months based on individual circumstances and deposits.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 29 Oct 2026 06:33:44 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 29 Oct 2026 06:33:45 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=932363" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Settlement-cheque presumptions survive unsupported security and alteration defences, while individual circumstances may reduce substantive imprisonment.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=105521</link>
      <description>Admitted execution and delivery of settlement cheques trigger presumptions of consideration and legally enforceable debt; a security-cheque defence must provide a probable basis to displace them. Completion of particulars in a voluntarily delivered signed cheque differs from material alteration, which requires proof of an unauthorised change to an existing entry; a collecting-bank endorsement alone does not establish alteration. Additional defence evidence on appeal is not an unrestricted entitlement and may be refused when belated, unproved, or unnecessary. Compensation should realistically reflect the cheque amount and deprivation of payment. The conviction, compensation and default sentence remained, while substantive imprisonment was reduced to six months based on individual circumstances and deposits.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 29 Oct 2026 06:33:44 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=105521</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>