https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=404624 Concurrent findings sustaining a conviction for cheque dishonour under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act were stated to merit no revisional interference where presentation, dishonour, statutory notice and timely complaint were proved, the defence explanation was rejected, and the Section 139 presumption remained unrebutted; revisional jurisdiction was said not to permit reappreciation of evidence absent perversity. The sentence was described as capable of modification by restricting imprisonment to the period already undergone while increasing the monetary burden, with the compensation retained and an additional fine imposed subject to payment within time and default consequences. en-us Fri, 19 Feb 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 26 Feb 2021 09:44:55 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=404624 Concurrent findings sustaining a conviction for cheque dishonour under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act were stated to merit no revisional interference where presentation, dishonour, statutory notice and timely complaint were proved, the defence explanation was rejected, and the Section 139 presumption remained unrebutted; revisional jurisdiction was said not to permit reappreciation of evidence absent perversity. The sentence was described as capable of modification by restricting imprisonment to the period already undergone while increasing the monetary burden, with the compensation retained and an additional fine imposed subject to payment within time and default consequences. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 19 Feb 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=404624