https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=359298 The complainant failed to prove that the cheque amounts were issued towards a legally enforceable liability under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, as the underlying debt was not satisfactorily established. The alleged USD card transaction was treated as doubtful because the travel schedule and billing sequence did not coherently explain the card's movement, and no acknowledged vouchers were produced for two foreign exchange transactions. The travel card statement was also not proved in accordance with the Bankers' Book Evidence Act or supported by the required Section 65B certificate. The Trial Court's finding that no legally recoverable debt was proved was held neither illegal nor perverse, and the acquittal was upheld. en-us Fri, 20 Apr 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 27 Apr 2018 07:11:41 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=359298 The complainant failed to prove that the cheque amounts were issued towards a legally enforceable liability under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, as the underlying debt was not satisfactorily established. The alleged USD card transaction was treated as doubtful because the travel schedule and billing sequence did not coherently explain the card's movement, and no acknowledged vouchers were produced for two foreign exchange transactions. The travel card statement was also not proved in accordance with the Bankers' Book Evidence Act or supported by the required Section 65B certificate. The Trial Court's finding that no legally recoverable debt was proved was held neither illegal nor perverse, and the acquittal was upheld. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 20 Apr 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=359298