, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH, CHENNAI ... , , , BEFORE SHRI N.R.S.GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M.P. NO.40/MDS./2015 (I.T.A.NO.1475 /MDS./2010 ASSESSMENT YEAR :2008-09) THE MADRAS MEDICAL MISSION , L FLOOR, 4-A,DR.JJ NAGAR, MOGAPPAIR, CHENNAI 600 037. VS. THE ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE III(4), CHENNAI-34. PAN AAATT 0433 G ( / APPELLANT ) ( / RESPONDENT ) ! / APPELLANT BY : DR.ANITHA SUMANTH,ADVOCATE '# ! / RESPONDENT BY : MR.P.RADHAKRISHNAN,JCIT, D.R $ % &' / DATE OF HEARING : 04 .03.2016 () * &' /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 11.03.2016 / O R D E R PER CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: THIS MISCELLANEOUS PETITION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE SEEKING RECALL OF THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED 31.07.2014 IN IT A NO.1475/MDS./2010. MP NO.40/MDS/2015 2 2. IN THIS CASE, ORIGINALLY THE REVENUE CAME UP IN APPEAL BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL. THE TRIBUNAL WHILE ADJUDICATING THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE ALONG WITH OTHER APPEALS FILED BY THE REVEN UE FOR ASSESSMENT YEARS 2003-04, 2004-05, 2006-07 & 2007-0 8 IN ITA NOS.1470 TO 1474/MDS./2015 RESPECTIVELY, HAD NOT AD JUDICATED THE GROUND RELATING TO THE ADDITION OF RS.18 LAKHS MADE TOWARDS UNACCOUNTED CAPITATION FEE COLLECTED FOR THE COURSE OF NURSING. DUE TO HIS REASON, THE REVENUE FILED A MP NO.34/MDS./20 14. AS SUCH THE TRIBUNAL VIDE ORDER DATED 20.06.2014 IN MP NO.34/M DS./2014 RECALLED THE EARLIER ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL CITED SU PRA AND ADJUDICATED THIS ISSUE VIDE ORDER DATED 31.07.2014 OBSERVING TH AT THE ASSESSEE HAD COLLECTED CAPITATION FEES FROM THE STUDENTS ADM ITTED TO THE NURSING COURSE AND THIS CAPITATION FEES WERE NOT RE CORDED IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE. THEREFORE, AO WA S JUSTIFIED IN TREATING THE SAID SUM OF ` 18 LAKHS AS UNACCOUNTED CAPITATION FEES AND THE TRIBUNAL REVERSED THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) A ND RESTORED THE ORDER OF THE AO. 3. NOW, THE LD.A.R SUBMITS THAT THE TRIBUNAL WRON GLY OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT FURNISHED DETAILS RELATIN G THE AMOUNT MP NO.40/MDS/2015 3 REFUNDED TO THE APPLICANTS, WHO WERE NOT ADMITTED T O THE NURSING COURSE AND CONCLUDING THIS THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD CO LLECTED CAPITATION FEES FROM THE STUDENTS, WHICH WERE NOT REFLECTED IN THE REGULAR BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS. LD.A.R SUBMITS THAT AT THE TIME OF SEA RCH, THE ACCOUNTS WERE NOT COMPLETE AND PROCEEDED MERELY NOT ON THE B ASIS OF THE FACTUAL POSITION. FURTHER, SHE SUBMITS THAT THE ADJ USTMENT OF FEES COLLECTED AGAINST ADMISSION FEES IS ON RECORD DESPI TE REFUND OF AMOUNTS TO STUDENTS WAS NOT ADMITTED. SHE SUBMITS THAT THERE IS MISTAKE APPARENT ON RECORD TO AS TO RECALL THE ORDE R OF THE TRIBUNAL AND THE ASSESSEE NOT WANTS TO REVIEW THE ORDER OF T HE TRIBUNAL. THE LD.D.R STRONGLY OPPOSED THE ARGUMENT OF THE LD.A.R . 4. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD. IN OUR OPINION, THE TRIBUNAL GIVEN A CATEG ORICAL FINDING THAT THERE IS AN UNACCOUNTED RECEIPT OF CAPITATION FEES AND IT IS TO BE TAXED IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE. ACCORDINGLY, THE TRI BUNAL HAS UPHELD THE ORDER OF THE AO AND REVERSED THE ORDER OF THE C IT(A). NOW, THE LD.A.R WANTS TO REVIEW THE EARLIER ORDER OF THE TRI BUNAL FOR WHICH THIS TRIBUNAL HAS NO POWER U/S.252(4) OF THE ACT. THERE MAY BE AN ERROR MP NO.40/MDS/2015 4 OF JUDGMENT AND IT CANNOT BE SAID THAT THERE IS AN ERROR APPARENT ON RECORD SO AS TO RECTIFY THE SAME. IF THERE IS AN E RROR OF JUDGMENT, REMEDY LIES ELSEWHERE, NOT BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. AC CORDINGLY, THIS PLEA OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE MISCELLANEOUS PETITION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON FRIDAY , THE 11 TH OF MARCH,2016 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- ( ' . . '# . $ ) ( N.R.S.GANESAN ) ( ) (CHANDRA POOJARI) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER CHENNAI, DATED THE 11 TH MARCH,2016 . K S SUNDARAM. '&+, - ,*& /COPY TO: 1. /APPELLANT 2. '# /RESPONDENT 3. $ .& () /CIT(A) 4. $ .& /CIT 5. ,1 '&23 /DR 6. 45 6% /GF