<?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>Fabricated business arrangement evidence defeats cheque defence, and statutory presumption under Section 138 is restored after acquittal set aside</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=101043</link>
    <description>The alleged joint business arrangement, supply transactions and supporting documents were not proved, so the civil money claim failed and the recovery suit was dismissed. The agreement and related documents were found unreliable because the date was inconsistent with the stamp paper purchase, delivery of materials was not established through supporting witnesses, and several connecting documents were treated as fabricated. Testimony already examined and cross-examined could not be wholly eschewed merely because later cross-examination did not occur, and its probative value had to be assessed. In the cheque dishonour matter, the accused failed to rebut the statutory presumption of a legally enforceable debt, so the acquittal was set aside and the conviction and sentence restored.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 24 Jun 2026 07:08:06 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 24 Jun 2026 07:08:09 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=908334" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Fabricated business arrangement evidence defeats cheque defence, and statutory presumption under Section 138 is restored after acquittal set aside</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=101043</link>
      <description>The alleged joint business arrangement, supply transactions and supporting documents were not proved, so the civil money claim failed and the recovery suit was dismissed. The agreement and related documents were found unreliable because the date was inconsistent with the stamp paper purchase, delivery of materials was not established through supporting witnesses, and several connecting documents were treated as fabricated. Testimony already examined and cross-examined could not be wholly eschewed merely because later cross-examination did not occur, and its probative value had to be assessed. In the cheque dishonour matter, the accused failed to rebut the statutory presumption of a legally enforceable debt, so the acquittal was set aside and the conviction and sentence restored.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 24 Jun 2026 07:08:06 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=101043</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>