https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=779267 Bombay HC held that offence under Section 138 N.I. Act was not made out because the complainant failed to prove valid receipt of the statutory notice. Postal presumption under Section 27 and business presumptions under Section 114 could not supply service where the person who accepted the notice was not shown to be a family member or authorised recipient. Because receipt was not established, the 15-day contingency for payment under Section 138(c) did not arise. The appellate acquittal was therefore upheld and the appeal dismissed. en-us Fri, 26 Sep 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 03 Oct 2025 08:30:36 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=779267 Bombay HC held that offence under Section 138 N.I. Act was not made out because the complainant failed to prove valid receipt of the statutory notice. Postal presumption under Section 27 and business presumptions under Section 114 could not supply service where the person who accepted the notice was not shown to be a family member or authorised recipient. Because receipt was not established, the 15-day contingency for payment under Section 138(c) did not arise. The appellate acquittal was therefore upheld and the appeal dismissed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 26 Sep 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=779267