https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=401263 In a prosecution under the Negotiable Instruments Act, admission of the cheque signature triggered the presumptions under Sections 118 and 139 that the cheque was issued for consideration and discharge of a debt or liability. The accused failed to rebut those presumptions with a probable, cogent defence; a bare plea that the cheque was given as security in a chitty transaction was insufficient, so the Section 138 conviction was upheld. The request to admit additional evidence in revision and remit the matter was rejected because the material was not essential to the core dispute and no failure of justice was shown. The sentence was altered to a fine with default imprisonment. en-us Mon, 23 Nov 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 03 Dec 2020 10:54:55 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=401263 In a prosecution under the Negotiable Instruments Act, admission of the cheque signature triggered the presumptions under Sections 118 and 139 that the cheque was issued for consideration and discharge of a debt or liability. The accused failed to rebut those presumptions with a probable, cogent defence; a bare plea that the cheque was given as security in a chitty transaction was insufficient, so the Section 138 conviction was upheld. The request to admit additional evidence in revision and remit the matter was rejected because the material was not essential to the core dispute and no failure of justice was shown. The sentence was altered to a fine with default imprisonment. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 23 Nov 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=401263