https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=280888 A scheme promising doubling of subscribers' money only after further members were enrolled was treated as a money circulation scheme under Section 2(c) of the Prize, Chits and Money Circulation Schemes (Banning) Act, 1978, because payment depended on a contingency linked to continued enrolment. The earlier precedent relied on by the appellants was distinguished on that basis, and the refusal to discharge was upheld. On the cheating charge, the representation that unit holders would receive double the amount was found prima facie false and capable of inducing the public to part with money, so a charge under Section 420 read with Section 34 IPC was rightly framed, leaving guilt for trial. en-us Thu, 10 Jul 2008 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 24 May 2019 12:24:26 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=280888 A scheme promising doubling of subscribers' money only after further members were enrolled was treated as a money circulation scheme under Section 2(c) of the Prize, Chits and Money Circulation Schemes (Banning) Act, 1978, because payment depended on a contingency linked to continued enrolment. The earlier precedent relied on by the appellants was distinguished on that basis, and the refusal to discharge was upheld. On the cheating charge, the representation that unit holders would receive double the amount was found prima facie false and capable of inducing the public to part with money, so a charge under Section 420 read with Section 34 IPC was rightly framed, leaving guilt for trial. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 10 Jul 2008 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=280888