##PAGE1##

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL

AHMEDABAD “D” BENCH

Before: DR. BRR Kumar, Vice President

And Shri T. R. Senthil Kumar, Judicial Member

ITA No: 2021/Ahd/2025

Assessment Year: 2016-17

The ACIT M/s. Schaeffler India Ltd.

Circle-1(1)(1), (Formerly known INA

Vadodara Vs Bearing India Pvt. Ltd.)

PO-Maneja, Vadodara,

Gujarat-390013

PAN: AAACI7163H

(Appellant) (Respondent)

Revenue Represented: Shri Sher Singh, CIT-DR

Assessee Represented: Shri Milin Mehta, A.R.

Date of hearing : 18-03-2026

Date of pronouncement : 22-04-2026

आदेश/ORDER

PER : T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER:-

This appeal is filed by the Revenue as against the appellate order

dated 05-08-2025 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax

(Appeals)-13, Ahmedabad arising out of the assessment order passed

under section 143(3) r.w.s. 144C of the Income Tax Act, 1961

(hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) relating to the Assessment Year

2016-17.

I.T.A No. 2021/Ahd/2025 A.Y. 2016-17 2

ACIT Vs. M/s. Schaeffler India Ltd. (Formerly known as INA Bearing India Pvt. Ltd.)

2. Brief facts of the case is that the assessee is a Company engaged in

the business of manufacturing, development, marketing and

distribution of roller bearing, linear bearing systems and engine

components. The assessee is one of the companies of Schaeffler Group

and in pursuance of the scheme of amalgamation approved by National

Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), Mumbai Bench, vide order dated 08-10-

2018, it got amalgamated with Schaeffler India Ltd. w.e.f. 01-01-018.

Pursuant to the same, the assessee’s case was transferred from DCIT,

Pune on 28-11-2018 to ACIT, Circle-1(1)(2), Vadodara. Thereafter notice

u/s. 142(1) of the Act was issued and assessment was completed

making Upward Adjustments by passing a draft assessment order and

final assessment order dated 17-01-2020 in the name of M/s. INA

Bearings India Pvt. Ltd.

3. Aggrieved against the assessment order, assessee filed an appeal

before Ld. CIT(A) raising legal ground that the assessment order passed

on a non-existing legal entity, which is invalid in law, when the

assessing officer was brought to his notice vide assessee’s letter dated

31-10-2018 and also the assessee filed the order of NCLT dated 08-10-

2018. Thus relying upon Hon’ble Supreme Court judgment in the case

of PCIT vs. Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. [2019] 107 taxmann.com 375 and

Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Anokhi Realty (P) Ltd. vs. ITO

[2023] 153 taxmann.com 275, Ld. CIT(A) considered the above legal

ground and held that the assessment is framed on a non-existing legal

entity, thereby quashed the entire assessment by observing as follows:

“….5.4 I have carefully gone through the grounds of appeal, statement of fact,

assessment order passed by the AO, written submission uploaded and judicial

decisions relied upon by the appellant on the issue It is an admitted fact on

I.T.A No. 2021/Ahd/2025 A.Y. 2016-17 3

ACIT Vs. M/s. Schaeffler India Ltd. (Formerly known as INA Bearing India Pvt. Ltd.)

record that INA Bearings India Pvt. Limited was merged with Schaeffler India

Ltd. vide NCLT order dated 08.10.2018 and the same was also informed to the

department on 31.10.2018 to the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle

1(1), Pune. Subsequently, case records of the appellant were transferred to the

AO having jurisdiction over Schaeffler India Limited at Vadodara on

28.11.2018. The replies before the AO le. ACIT. Circle-1(1)(2), Vadodara were

filed by Schaeffler India Limited in capacity of successor of INA Bearings India

Pvt. Ltd. It was also submitted that Schaeffler India Limited has also intimated

the AO at Vadodara about the merger of INA Bearings India Pvt. Ltd. vide letter

dated 05.11.2018 Despite all these facts available at the time of assessment

order, AO. ACIT, Circle-1(1)(2), Vadodara had passed the final assessment

order in the name of "INA Bearings India Pvt. Ltd." on 17.01.2020 which was

not existent at the time of passing of the assessment order. All these facts

clearly demonstrate that Assessing Officer was