JUDGMENT
R.K. Abichandani, J.
1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench “C”, has referred for the opinion of this court the following questions under section 18 of the companies (profits) Surtax Act read with section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 :
“1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the sum of Rs. 74,693 deposited with the Industrial Development Bank of India in lieu of surcharge on income-tax under the Finance Act, 1984, was not deductible from the chargeable profits computed under the First Schedule to the Companies (Profits) Surtax Act, 1964?
2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the surtax payable under the Companies (Profits) Surtax Act, 1964, was not deductible while computing the chargeable profits under the First Schedule to the Companies (profits) Surtax Act, 1964?”
2. As regards question No. 1, dealing with a similar question in Surtax Reference No. 14 of 1984 (Ambica Mills Ltd. v. CST [1994] 206 ITR 699 (Guj)), decided on January 13, 1994, we have held that the deposit made with the Industrial Development Bank of India cannot be treated as tax paid. The deposit essentially differs from payment of tax and though the liability to pay the surcharge is taken away by making the deposit with the Industrial Development bank of India, it cannot be treated as any deemed payment of surcharge. Further, such deposit results in removing the liability of making the payment of surcharge and the tax ceases to be payable to the extent of the deposit. Therefore, no question of deduction under rule 2(i) of the Rules for computing the chargeable profits contained in the First Schedule to the Act can arise. Hence, question No. 1 referred to us is answered in the affirmative, in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee.
3. As regards question No. 2, it would appear that the tax authorities rightly rejected the assessee’s claim for deduction of the amount of surtax while computing the chargeable profits. It will be noticed that there is no provision for reducing the amount of surtax in rule 2 of the First Schedule. Rule 2(1) only authorises a deduction of the income-tax payable by the company. The Tribunal was, therefore, right in holding that the surtax payable under the said act was not deductible while computing the chargeable profits under the First Schedule to the said Act. Question No. 2 referred to us is, therefore, answered in the affirmative, in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee.
4. The reference stands disposed of accordingly with no order as to costs.