Motilal Padampat Udyog Ltd. v. CIT Allahabad High Court, Motilal Padampat Udyog Ltd. v. CIT

293 ITR 56Reported decision#20341 most cited
4

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 348,607 Indian tax judgments — from 2025 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 10(38)Section 132Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 68Section 142(1)Section 132(4)

Issues it is cited on

circular tradingaudi alteram partembogus long term capital gainbogus ltcgpanchnamaaddition under section 68penny stocksection 10(38)long term capital gainsdocuments seizedlong term capital gainsection 132(4)

Judgments citing Motilal Padampat Udyog Ltd. v. CIT Allahabad High Court, Motilal Padampat Udyog Ltd. v. CIT

Vishwas Shashikant Choksi, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle 6(2), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1399/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Nov 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan () Assessment Year: 2015-16

…in nature, there is no legal requirement for cross requirement for cross- examination. Allahabad High Court, Motilal Padampat Udyog Ltd. v. CIT Allahabad High Court, Motilal Padampat Udyog Ltd. v. CIT Allahabad High Court, Motilal Padampat Udyog Ltd. v. CIT [293 ITR 56 [293 ITR 565]: The Court held that the right of cross 5]: The Court held that the right of cross- examination of persons from whom AO has collected evidence examination of persons from whom AO has collected evidence examination of persons from whom AO has collected evidence is not required under the Income is not required under the Income-tax law.…

Gautam Ashok Choksi, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle 6(2), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1398/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Nov 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan () Assessment Year: 2015-16

…in nature, there is no legal requirement for cross requirement for cross- examination. Allahabad High Court, Motilal Padampat Udyog Ltd. v. CIT Allahabad High Court, Motilal Padampat Udyog Ltd. v. CIT Allahabad High Court, Motilal Padampat Udyog Ltd. v. CIT [293 ITR 56 [293 ITR 565]: The Court held that the right of cross 5]: The Court held that the right of cross- examination of persons from whom AO has collected evidence examination of persons from whom AO has collected evidence examination of persons from whom AO has collected evidence is not required under the Income is not required under the Income-tax law.…

Gaurav Abhay Choksi, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle 6(2), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1397/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Nov 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan () Assessment Year: 2015-16

…in nature, there is no legal requirement for cross requirement for cross- examination. Allahabad High Court, Motilal Padampat Udyog Ltd. v. CIT Allahabad High Court, Motilal Padampat Udyog Ltd. v. CIT Allahabad High Court, Motilal Padampat Udyog Ltd. v. CIT [293 ITR 56 [293 ITR 565]: The Court held that the right of cross 5]: The Court held that the right of cross- examination of persons from whom AO has collected evidence examination of persons from whom AO has collected evidence examination of persons from whom AO has collected evidence is not required under the Income is not required under the Income-tax law.…

Ashish Shashikant Choksi, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 6(2), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1341/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Nov 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan () Assessment Year: 2015-16

…in nature, there is no legal requirement for cross requirement for cross- examination. Allahabad High Court, Motilal Padampat Udyog Ltd. v. CIT Allahabad High Court, Motilal Padampat Udyog Ltd. v. CIT Allahabad High Court, Motilal Padampat Udyog Ltd. v. CIT [293 ITR 56 [293 ITR 565]: The Court held that the right of cross 5]: The Court held that the right of cross- examination of persons from whom AO has collected evidence examination of persons from whom AO has collected evidence examination of persons from whom AO has collected evidence is not required under the Income is not required under the Income-tax law.…