https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=400201 Admitted cheque execution and signature attracted the statutory presumption that the instrument was issued towards a legally recoverable debt, and the accused was required to rebut it with credible evidence. The defence was found unconvincing because the accused admitted receipt of the statutory notice but gave no reply, did not challenge the complainant's lending capacity at the proper stage, and failed to substantiate the alleged defence transaction or examine the material witness. The concurrent findings below were therefore held to be justified, and interference with the conviction and sentence was not warranted in revision. en-us Fri, 16 Oct 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 23 Jul 2021 13:17:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=400201 Admitted cheque execution and signature attracted the statutory presumption that the instrument was issued towards a legally recoverable debt, and the accused was required to rebut it with credible evidence. The defence was found unconvincing because the accused admitted receipt of the statutory notice but gave no reply, did not challenge the complainant's lending capacity at the proper stage, and failed to substantiate the alleged defence transaction or examine the material witness. The concurrent findings below were therefore held to be justified, and interference with the conviction and sentence was not warranted in revision. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 16 Oct 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=400201