9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (2) TMI 676X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... arned MM as the cheque in the sum of Rs.5,50,000/- (cheque bearing no. 784391), issued by the respondent, was dishonoured on presentation. 3. The said cheque was presented for encashment but the same had been returned unpaid on 23.05.2014, with the remarks, "04-refer to drawer". 4. The respondent issued a notice under Section 138 of the NI Act, which was sent by registered post. 5. The respondent led the pre-summoning evidence and thereafter, summons were issued and subsequently a notice under Section 251 of the Cr.P.C. was served on the petitioner. 6. The petitioner stated that she had obtained a loan of Rs.5,00,000/- from the complainant (respondent) with interest at the rate of 5% per annum and had issued the said cheque in question. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hich mandates that all money-lenders are required to be registered under the said Act. He submitted that since the said loan was illegal, the same was not an enforceable debt and, therefore, Section 138 of the NI Act was wholly inapplicable. 10. Next, he submitted that the payment of more than Rs.20,000/- in cash violates the provisions of Section 269 SS of the Income Tax Act, 1961 which prohibits grant of any loan or advance over a sum of Rs.20,000/- in cash. He submitted that since the said loan was in violation to the provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961 the same was not an enforceable debt. He relied upon by the decision of the Bombay High Court in Sanjay Mishra v. Kanishka Kapoor @ Nikkin and Anr.: 2009 (4) Mah.L.J.155 in support of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nce that the respondent had been carrying out the activity of money lending as a business. The respondent had also expressly denied that he had given any loan on interest to public persons. 13. The contention that the debt owed by the petitioner was rendered unenforceable by virtue of the provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is also unmerited. 14. Section 269SS of the Income Tax Act, 1961 prohibits making of any payment in cash above a sum of Rs.20,000/-. Thus, any person violating the same would attract imposition of penalties under the said Act. However, the same does not render the said debt un-enforceable or precludes the lender from recovering the same. 15. The decision of the Bombay High Court in Sanjay Mishra (supra) is also ina ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
