<?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>Accused Successfully Rebuts Presumption Under Section 138 NI Act as Petitioner Fails to Prove Underlying Debt</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=85480</link>
    <description>HC upheld acquittal in cheque dishonor case under Section 138 of NI Act. While respondents admitted signing cheques, they successfully rebutted statutory presumptions under Sections 118 and 139 through preponderance of probability. Petitioner&#039;s evidence, including unverified computer-generated account statements lacking company authentication, failed to establish the alleged debt of INR 1.10 Crores. The court found that without proving the principal liability, claims for returns or interest were untenable. Key factor was petitioner&#039;s inability to discharge shifted burden of proof regarding existence of investment/loan after respondents established probable defense. Trial court&#039;s acquittal order maintained as respondents effectively negated existence of legally enforceable debt.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 05 Feb 2025 08:38:07 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 05 Feb 2025 08:38:08 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=795442" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Accused Successfully Rebuts Presumption Under Section 138 NI Act as Petitioner Fails to Prove Underlying Debt</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=85480</link>
      <description>HC upheld acquittal in cheque dishonor case under Section 138 of NI Act. While respondents admitted signing cheques, they successfully rebutted statutory presumptions under Sections 118 and 139 through preponderance of probability. Petitioner&#039;s evidence, including unverified computer-generated account statements lacking company authentication, failed to establish the alleged debt of INR 1.10 Crores. The court found that without proving the principal liability, claims for returns or interest were untenable. Key factor was petitioner&#039;s inability to discharge shifted burden of proof regarding existence of investment/loan after respondents established probable defense. Trial court&#039;s acquittal order maintained as respondents effectively negated existence of legally enforceable debt.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 05 Feb 2025 08:38:07 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=85480</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>