https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=295275 The Appellate Court upheld the Trial Court's judgment, dismissing the appeal and maintaining the respondent's acquittal. The respondent effectively rebutted the presumption under Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act by demonstrating inconsistencies in the complainant's evidence and proving his presence at work during the alleged transaction. The complainant failed to establish a legally enforceable debt, as required under Section 138, due to dubious documentary evidence and the absence of the transaction in Income Tax Returns. The Appellate Court found no perversity in the Trial Court's decision, affirming the respondent's acquittal. en-us Wed, 24 Jul 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 12 Nov 2024 13:19:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=295275 The Appellate Court upheld the Trial Court's judgment, dismissing the appeal and maintaining the respondent's acquittal. The respondent effectively rebutted the presumption under Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act by demonstrating inconsistencies in the complainant's evidence and proving his presence at work during the alleged transaction. The complainant failed to establish a legally enforceable debt, as required under Section 138, due to dubious documentary evidence and the absence of the transaction in Income Tax Returns. The Appellate Court found no perversity in the Trial Court's decision, affirming the respondent's acquittal. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 24 Jul 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=295275