<?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>2026 (4) TMI 509 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=789440</link>
    <description>At the stage of issuance of process in a Section 138 NI Act complaint, once the complainant pleads the foundational facts of cheque issuance, dishonour, statutory notice and timely filing, the Section 139 presumption arises in favour of the holder, including that the cheque was issued for a legally enforceable debt or liability. That presumption operates as a reverse onus and cannot ordinarily be treated as rebutted without evidence at the threshold. Where issuance and signature on the cheque are undisputed, the existence of liability is a matter for trial, to be tested on evidence. The pre-trial dismissal of the complaint was therefore unsustainable, and the complaint had to be restored for decision on merits.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 07 Apr 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 09 Apr 2026 08:09:03 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=895938" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (4) TMI 509 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=789440</link>
      <description>At the stage of issuance of process in a Section 138 NI Act complaint, once the complainant pleads the foundational facts of cheque issuance, dishonour, statutory notice and timely filing, the Section 139 presumption arises in favour of the holder, including that the cheque was issued for a legally enforceable debt or liability. That presumption operates as a reverse onus and cannot ordinarily be treated as rebutted without evidence at the threshold. Where issuance and signature on the cheque are undisputed, the existence of liability is a matter for trial, to be tested on evidence. The pre-trial dismissal of the complaint was therefore unsustainable, and the complaint had to be restored for decision on merits.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 07 Apr 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=789440</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>