VittSphere ONE Calculators Blog CA Prabhakar Kumar · FCA · ICAI 560762
Case lawCBDT Circulars & Instructions › Statutory position — s.47A: the four withdrawals of exemption, the year each is charged and in whose hands, and the amalgamation and demerger clauses it does not touch
CBDT Circulars & InstructionsCuts both wayss.47As.47A(1)s.47A(2)s.47A(3)s.47A(4)s.47s.47(iv)s.47(v)s.47(xi)s.47(xiii)s.47(xiv)s.47(xiiib)s.45s.2(1B)s.2(19AA)s.72A(3)

Statutory position — s.47A: the four withdrawals of exemption, the year each is charged and in whose hands, and the amalgamation and demerger clauses it does not touch

Our amalgamation stopped satisfying a condition after the event. Can the department invoke section 47A to take back the section 47(vi) exemption, and if it can, in which year and on whom?

Our amalgamation stopped satisfying a condition after the event. Can the department invoke section 47A to take back the section 47(vi) exemption, and if it can, in which year and on whom?

Section 47A does not reach the amalgamation and demerger clauses at all. It withdraws the exemption in exactly four situations: sub-section (1), where a capital asset transferred under s.47(iv) or (v) — the holding company to wholly-owned subsidiary transfers — is converted into or treated as stock-in-trade, or the whole of the share capital ceases to be held, within eight years; sub-section (2), where shares allotted on a s.47(xi) conversion of a stock exchange membership are transferred within three years; sub-section (3), where a condition in the proviso to s.47(xiii) or (xiv) is broken; and sub-section (4), where a condition in the proviso to s.47(xiiib) is broken. Clauses (vi), (via), (vib), (vic), (vicc), (vid) and (vii) — the amalgamation and demerger exemptions — appear nowhere in section 47A.

Decided by the CBDT Circulars & Instructions (Not applicable — statutory text) on 2026-04-01, reported as Income-tax Act, 1961, s.47A, as printed on the departmental Year 2026 page and identically on the Year 2024 (No. 2) page. It bears on section 47A, section 47A(1), section 47A(2), section 47A(3), section 47A(4), section 47, section 47(iv), section 47(v), section 47(xi), section 47(xiii), section 47(xiv), section 47(xiiib), section 45, section 2(1B), section 2(19AA), section 72A(3) of the Income Tax Act 1961, in Capital Gains, Capital Gains Exemptions and How Tax Law Is Read matters.

Still good law. The Year 2026 departmental page is the current edition and prints section 47A word for word identically with the Year 2024 (No. 2) page, which is the strongest evidence available on this pass that the section has not moved. No Finance Act text was read and no footnote naming an amending Act could be retrieved, so this entry states the text and not its legislative history. I did not check judicial treatment of section 47A; the library already holds PCIT v Mobisoft Tele Solutions P Ltd on s.47A(3), CIT v Prakash Electric Company on s.47A(3) and ACIT v Celerity Power LLP on s.47A(4).

Why it matters

Practitioners frequently assume that the reorganisation exemptions come with a claw-back the way s.54 or s.47(iv) do. They do not. The discipline on an amalgamation or demerger is imposed at the front end, by the definitions in s.2(1B) and s.2(19AA): if a condition of the definition is failed, the transaction was never an amalgamation or a demerger, and the s.47 clauses never applied in the first place. That is a materially different exposure. It is not a deemed income charge in a later year on the transferee; it is the original year's capital gain, assessed on the original transferor, with all that follows for limitation, for who receives the notice and for whether the transferor still exists. The four withdrawals that section 47A does contain each answer the three questions a practitioner needs separately, and the answers are not the same. Under sub-section (1) the withdrawn gain is charged "of the previous year in which such transfer took place" — that is, back in the year of the original transfer, not the year of the breach. Under sub-section (2) it is charged in the previous year in which the shares are transferred. Under sub-section (3) it is charged as the profits and gains of the SUCCESSOR COMPANY for the previous year in which the requirement is not complied with. Under sub-section (4) it is charged for the previous year in which the requirement is not complied with, on "the successor limited liability partnership or the shareholder of the predecessor company, as the case may be" — the only one of the four that can reach a shareholder. Contrast s.72A(3), which for the loss set-off charges the year of breach in the amalgamated company's hands: the tax Act uses both the year-of-breach and the year-of-original-transfer techniques, and you have to read which one applies.

Binding on the department, not on the assessee or the courts. An assessee may rely on a circular that is beneficial to them.

Not yet CA-verified. This entry was found through the sources listed under the Sources tab, and the summary reflects what those sources say. Nobody has yet read the full judgment and signed it off. Check the source before relying on it.

Read aloud by your device. Press again to stop.

Related

Other authorities on the same sections.