https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=752465 In a cheque dishonour prosecution, proof of supply through invoices, delivery challans, return memos and supporting oral evidence was sufficient to establish the foundational facts and attract the statutory presumptions under the Negotiable Instruments Act; the accused failed to rebut them with a credible defence. A separate dispute with the manufacturer, non-production of the distributor-manufacturer agreement, and minor differences in witness testimony were held irrelevant to the direct sale transactions between the parties and did not justify acquittal. The cheques were treated as issued towards discharge of liability, not as mere security, and no material prejudice arose from the Section 313 examination. The acquittal was reversed. en-us Fri, 10 May 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 11 May 2024 10:52:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=752465 In a cheque dishonour prosecution, proof of supply through invoices, delivery challans, return memos and supporting oral evidence was sufficient to establish the foundational facts and attract the statutory presumptions under the Negotiable Instruments Act; the accused failed to rebut them with a credible defence. A separate dispute with the manufacturer, non-production of the distributor-manufacturer agreement, and minor differences in witness testimony were held irrelevant to the direct sale transactions between the parties and did not justify acquittal. The cheques were treated as issued towards discharge of liability, not as mere security, and no material prejudice arose from the Section 313 examination. The acquittal was reversed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 10 May 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=752465