STIC TRAVELS PVT. LTD,DELHI V. DCIT, CIRCL24(2), DELHI

ITA 5304/DEL/2025

AI Insights

The case involves STIC Travels Pvt. Ltd., the appellant, contesting penalties imposed by the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax under section 271(1)(c) for the Assessment Years 2013-14 and 2014-15. The penalties were based on additions confirmed by the CIT(A) regarding default revenue expenses. The Tribunal heard both appeals together due to the commonality of the issue and decided in favor of the assessee, finding that the issues raised were debatable and did not warrant penalties.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 829097 (ITAT-NEW DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 14-01-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: Delhi
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 29-08-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ANKUSH KALRA
• Assessee Lawyers: ATUL PURI
• Keywords: Revenue expenditure
• Section: 271(1)(c)

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH, ‘E’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI AMITABH SHUKLA, ACCOUNTNAT MEMBER ITA Nos.5303 & 5304/DEL/2025 [Assessment Years: 2013-14 and 2014-15] STIC Travels Pvt. Ltd. G-55, Connaught Circus New Delhi-110001 Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-24(2), C.R. Building, I.P. Estate New Delhi-110002 PAN-AAACS2231E Assessee Revenue Assessee by Shri Atul Puri, CA Revenue by Ms. Ankush Kalra, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 14.01.2026 Date of Pronouncement 14.01.2026 ORDER PER AMITABH SHUKLA, AM, The captioned appeals have been preferred by the assessee against order both dated 28.07.2025 of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)- 31, New Delhi, [hereinafter referred to as ‘ld. CIT(A)] arising out of assessment orders both dated 22.03.2019 passed u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 pertaining to Assessment Years 2013-14 and 2014-15 respectively. The word ‘Act’ herein this order would mean Income Tax Act, 1961. Printed from counselvise.com ITA Nos.5303 & 5303/Del/2025 Page 2 of 4 2. As the both the appeals involves the issue of levy of penalty, they were heard together and are being adjudicated by this common order. Considering the commonality of the issue, decision taken in AY 2013-14 shall apply mutatis mutandis to AY 2014-15. For the purposes of this order, AY 2013-14 is being taken as lead year. 3. The ld. Assessing Officer passed order dated 22.03.2019 under section 271(1)(c) for AY 2013-14. The ld. AO, inter alia, considering judicial precedents on the issue of penalty, imposed the penalty upon the premises that ld. CIT(A) has confirmed the addition on account of default revenue expenses. The ld. CIT(A) confirmed the penalty order concurring with the findings of the ld. AO. 4. Per contra, the ld. DR placed reliance upon the order of the lower authorities. 5. We have heard the rival submissions in the light of the material placed on record. It is the case of the assessee that there has neither been a case of wilful concealment or submission of inaccurate particulars of income on the part of the assessee. The ld. Counsel argued that the issue of default revenue expenditure is a debatable issue and that the same therefore would not attract invocation of penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act. Upon consideration of the matter, we find merit in the arguments of the appellant assessee. We are of the considered view that either of the twin ingredients of wilful concealment or Printed from counselvise.com ITA Nos.5303 & 5303/Del/2025 Page 3 of 4 submission of inaccurate particulars of income on the part of the assessee are not available in the present case so as to attract imposition of penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act. Accordingly, the orders of lower authorities is set- aside and the penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act imposed vide order dated 22.03.2019 is directed to be deleted. All the grounds of appeal raised by the appellant assessee are therefore allowed. 6. In the result, the appeal of the assessee for AY 2013-14 is allowed. 7. We have noted that the facts for the AY 2013-14 in assessee’s appeal vide ITA No.5303/Del/2025 are identical to ITA No.5304/Del/2025, decision taken for AY 2013-14 would apply mutatis mutandis to AY 2014-15. Accordingly, all the grounds of appeal for AY 2014-15 in ITA No.5304/Del/2015 are also allowed. 8. Finally, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on 14th January, 2026. Sd/- Sd/- [SATBEER SINGH GODARA] [AMITABH SHUKLA] JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 16.01.2026 Shekhar Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent Printed from counselvise.com ITA Nos.5303 & 5303/Del/2025 Page 4 of 4 3. PCIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR Asst. Registrar, ITAT, New Delhi, Printed from counselvise.com "