Benami transaction and beneficial ownership: documentary and circumstantial evidence show payors were true beneficiaries, resulting in PBPTA consequen...
Denial of Preferential Treatment under SAFTA overturned where unchallenged Country of Origin certificate warranted exemption under Notification benefi...
Continuing offence of money-laundering: discharge set aside and proceedings reinstated where laundering continued after inclusion of predicate offence...
In a revision against conviction under s.138 NI Act, the dominant issue was whether the accused rebutted the statutory presumptions under ss.118(a) and 139 after admitting the cheque and signature. Since issuance and signature were not disputed, presumption of legally enforceable debt arose and the accused led no credible rebuttal; the plea of non-receipt of notice failed as no payment was made within 15 days of summons. The revisional court held it could not reappreciate evidence absent perversity and found no jurisdictional error or patent illegality in the conviction. Compensation equal to the cheque amount was held not excessive. Revision was dismissed - HC
In a revision against conviction under s.138 NI Act, the dominant issue was whether the accused rebutted the statutory presumptions under ss.118(a) and 139 after admitting the cheque and signature. Since issuance and signature were not disputed, presumption of legally enforceable debt arose and the accused led no credible rebuttal; the plea of non-receipt of notice failed as no payment was made within 15 days of summons. The revisional court held it could not reappreciate evidence absent perversity and found no jurisdictional error or patent illegality in the conviction. Compensation equal to the cheque amount was held not excessive. Revision was dismissed - HC
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.