https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=775560 The HC held that the presumption under Section 139 of the NI Act covers legally enforceable debt, but this can be rebutted by the accused through a probable defence raising doubts on such debt's existence. Cash transactions exceeding Rs. 20,000 in violation of the Act 1961 do not create legally enforceable debt unless validly explained. In this case, the complainant failed to prove a legally enforceable debt as the payment in cash lacked explanation and violated tax provisions. The accused successfully rebutted the presumption under Section 139. Consequently, the conviction and sentence were set aside, and the accused was acquitted. The Criminal Revision Petition was allowed. en-us Fri, 25 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 28 Jul 2025 08:28:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=775560 The HC held that the presumption under Section 139 of the NI Act covers legally enforceable debt, but this can be rebutted by the accused through a probable defence raising doubts on such debt's existence. Cash transactions exceeding Rs. 20,000 in violation of the Act 1961 do not create legally enforceable debt unless validly explained. In this case, the complainant failed to prove a legally enforceable debt as the payment in cash lacked explanation and violated tax provisions. The accused successfully rebutted the presumption under Section 139. Consequently, the conviction and sentence were set aside, and the accused was acquitted. The Criminal Revision Petition was allowed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 25 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=775560