<?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>Rebuttable cheque dishonour presumption fails where the complainant cannot prove loan capacity, financial trail, or material witness.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=103580</link>
    <description>Statutory presumption of a legally enforceable debt following admission of a cheque signature is rebuttable on a preponderance of probabilities. In an alleged cash-loan transaction, failure to establish the complainant&#039;s financial capacity or a financial trail, together with non-examination of the eyewitness to the loan and cheque delivery, supported a probable defence that no loan existed. The lower courts&#039; reliance on the presumption and the accused&#039;s statement, without drawing an adverse inference for withholding the material witness, misallocated the burden of proof. The conviction was set aside and the accused acquitted of cheque dishonour.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 10 Sep 2026 08:51:20 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 10 Sep 2026 08:51:22 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=921808" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Rebuttable cheque dishonour presumption fails where the complainant cannot prove loan capacity, financial trail, or material witness.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=103580</link>
      <description>Statutory presumption of a legally enforceable debt following admission of a cheque signature is rebuttable on a preponderance of probabilities. In an alleged cash-loan transaction, failure to establish the complainant&#039;s financial capacity or a financial trail, together with non-examination of the eyewitness to the loan and cheque delivery, supported a probable defence that no loan existed. The lower courts&#039; reliance on the presumption and the accused&#039;s statement, without drawing an adverse inference for withholding the material witness, misallocated the burden of proof. The conviction was set aside and the accused acquitted of cheque dishonour.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 10 Sep 2026 08:51:20 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=103580</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>