<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2021 (7) TMI 310 - TRIPURA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=409468</link>
    <description>A voluntarily signed cheque, including a blank or collateral security cheque issued in a business transaction, attracts the statutory presumptions under Sections 118 and 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. Where the drawer admits issuance and signature but fails to rebut the presumption on a preponderance of probability, dishonour of the cheque supports criminal liability under Section 138, and the conviction was sustained. The sentence was, however, adjusted to align with the proved liability on record, with the fine reduced to the amount established while the default sentence and payment direction in favour of the complainant were maintained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 30 Jun 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 23 Jul 2021 12:55:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=649049" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2021 (7) TMI 310 - TRIPURA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=409468</link>
      <description>A voluntarily signed cheque, including a blank or collateral security cheque issued in a business transaction, attracts the statutory presumptions under Sections 118 and 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. Where the drawer admits issuance and signature but fails to rebut the presumption on a preponderance of probability, dishonour of the cheque supports criminal liability under Section 138, and the conviction was sustained. The sentence was, however, adjusted to align with the proved liability on record, with the fine reduced to the amount established while the default sentence and payment direction in favour of the complainant were maintained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 30 Jun 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=409468</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>