https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=417750 In a prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, the statutory presumption that a cheque was issued for a legally enforceable debt was rebutted because the complainant did not disclose the alleged cash loan in income tax returns, despite being an assessee. The surrounding evidence, including an unsatisfactory explanation for the cheque amount and an admission suggesting misuse of the deposited cheque, supported the defence. On these facts, the presumption under Section 139 stood displaced, and the cheque was not proved to have been issued towards a legally enforceable debt or liability, so the conviction could not stand. en-us Fri, 28 Jan 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 01 Feb 2022 08:29:45 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=417750 In a prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, the statutory presumption that a cheque was issued for a legally enforceable debt was rebutted because the complainant did not disclose the alleged cash loan in income tax returns, despite being an assessee. The surrounding evidence, including an unsatisfactory explanation for the cheque amount and an admission suggesting misuse of the deposited cheque, supported the defence. On these facts, the presumption under Section 139 stood displaced, and the cheque was not proved to have been issued towards a legally enforceable debt or liability, so the conviction could not stand. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 28 Jan 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=417750