@ HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR DB: Hon'ble Shri Dhirendra Mishra & Hon'ble Shri R.N. Chandrakar. JJ. Tax Case No. 5 of 2011 Appellant Respondent Vs. .Income Tax Officer, Korba Shri Sukhdeo Prasad Sahu, Balco Nagar, Korba Appeal under Section 260-A of Income Tax Act. 1961 Present: Shri Rajeev Shrivastava with Shri Sameer Shrivastava, counsel for the appellant. ORAL ORDER (Passed on 10th March, 2011) Per Dhirendra Mishra. J Heard. (1) This tax appeal under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (henceforth the 'Act') is directed against the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunai, Nagpur, and the same has been preferred on the substantial questions of law as enumerated in the memo of appeal. (2) Briefiy stated facts of the case as projected in the memo of appeal are that the respondent filed return of income for Assessment Year 2003-04 dectaring taxable income of Rs. 1,17,650/-. On scrutiny under Section 143(2) of the Act, the Assessing Officer ailowed exemption to the tune of Rs. 1 ,23,077/- in accordance with Section 10 (10 C) of the Act, which was actualiy received by the respondent and rejected the claim of Rs. 5,00,000/- and thereby added ex-gratia payment of ciaim exempted to the income of the assessee and the appeal preferred by the assessee before the Commissioner of income .^•^^^i ^»1 I. ":w^l 1 '%. ^^/ '%^^ ^T Tax (Appeais) was dismissed. However, the appeal preferred by the assessee was allowed bythe Tribunal by the impugned order, hence, this appeal. (3) Before entering into the merits of the case, Shri Rajeev Shrivastava and Shri Sameer Shrivastava, learned counsel for the appellant fairiy submits that tax effect involved in this appeal is Rs.1,72,065/-, which is less than monetary limit of Rs. 4,00,000/- fixed by the Centra! Board of Direct Taxes (henceforth the 'Board') vide instruction No. 5/2008 dated 15.05.2010 for filing appeal before the High Court. (4) in view of the aforesaid submissions of the tearned counse! for the appeilant and considering negligible tax effect invoived in this appeal, which is less than minimum monetary iimit fixed by the Board for filing an appeai before this High Court, we do not deem it necessary to go into the merits of the case and we dismiss this appeai having negligible tax effect. Vijay Sd/- Dhirendra Mishra Judge Sd/- R.N. Chandrakar Judge