Business Combinations and Consolidated Financial Statements — Practice

Question 1

A parent acquires 80% of a subsidiary for consideration of ₹400 lakh. The fair value of the 20% NCI at acquisition is separately determined to be ₹90 lakh. The fair value of the subsidiary's identifiable net assets at acquisition is ₹450 lakh. Compute goodwill using the fair value method of measuring NCI.

Accepted Answer

Goodwill = (Consideration transferred + Fair value of NCI) − Fair value of identifiable net assets = (₹400 lakh + ₹90 lakh) − ₹450 lakh = ₹490 lakh − ₹450 lakh = ₹40 lakh. This ₹40 lakh goodwill figure includes NCI's own proportionate share of goodwill, since the fair value method measures NCI at its own acquisition-date fair value, which itself reflects NCI's share of the combined entity's goodwill; the resulting ₹40 lakh goodwill therefore represents total goodwill of the combination as a whole, attributable partly to the parent and partly to NCI, both shown together as a single consolidated goodwill figure on the consolidated balance sheet.

Question 2

Using the same facts as the previous problem — 80% acquired for ₹400 lakh consideration, fair value of identifiable net assets ₹450 lakh — compute goodwill instead using the proportionate share of net identifiable assets method for measuring NCI, and explain why the resulting goodwill figure differs from the fair value method.

Accepted Answer

Under the proportionate share method, NCI is measured at its 20% share of the fair value of identifiable net assets = 20% × ₹450 lakh = ₹90 lakh. Goodwill = (Consideration transferred + NCI measured under this method) − Fair value of identifiable net assets = (₹400 lakh + ₹90 lakh) − ₹450 lakh = ₹40 lakh. In this particular case, the two methods happen to produce the same ₹40 lakh goodwill figure only because the fair value of NCI (₹90 lakh, given in the first problem) happens to exactly equal 20% of the fair value of identifiable net assets (also ₹90 lakh); this coincidence would not generally hold. Where NCI's fair value differs from its strict proportionate share of net assets (for instance, if NCI shares traded at a premium or discount to their proportionate net asset value, reflecting factors like a lack of control or differing minority-share liquidity), the fair value method would recognise goodwill attributable to NCI at a different amount from its proportionate share, and the two methods would produce genuinely different total goodwill figures — the fair value method always includes NCI's own goodwill share (whatever it happens to be, based on NCI's actual fair value), while the proportionate share method, by definition, always excludes any goodwill attributable to NCI entirely, recognising goodwill relating only to the parent's own acquired interest.

Question 3

A parent holds 70% of a subsidiary. During the year, the subsidiary sold goods costing ₹40 lakh to the parent for ₹50 lakh, and the parent still holds all of this inventory, unsold, at the reporting date. Compute the unrealised profit to be eliminated on consolidation, and explain why it is not reduced to reflect only the parent's 70% ownership share.

Accepted Answer

Unrealised profit = Selling price ₹50 lakh − Cost ₹40 lakh = ₹10 lakh, and since the parent still holds this inventory entirely unsold at the reporting date, the full ₹10 lakh remains unrealised from the group's perspective. The full ₹10 lakh, not merely 70% of it (₹7 lakh), is eliminated on consolidation, because a consolidated financial statement is prepared from the perspective of the group as a single economic entity, and from that single-entity perspective, no sale to an external party has occurred at all — the inventory has simply moved from one part of the group to another, and any profit the subsidiary recorded on that internal transfer is entirely artificial from the group's own consolidated viewpoint, regardless of what percentage of the subsidiary the parent happens to own. Since the subsidiary, the seller, recognised this profit, the elimination is charged against the subsidiary's post-acquisition profit, and is then split between the parent's share and NCI's share in the ordinary course of attributing the subsidiary's (now-reduced) profit between the two, rather than the elimination itself being scaled down by the parent's ownership percentage at the point of elimination.

Question 4

A subsidiary is 75% owned by a parent, with NCI holding the remaining 25%. NCI's cumulative post-acquisition share of the subsidiary's equity, before this year's results, stands at ₹8 lakh. This year, the subsidiary incurs a loss, of which NCI's 25% share is ₹12 lakh. Explain how this year's loss allocation to NCI should be treated, even though it exceeds NCI's existing equity balance.

Accepted Answer

Ind AS 110 requires total comprehensive income, including losses, to be attributed to the owners of the parent and to NCI based on their respective ownership interests, even if this attribution results in NCI having a deficit (negative) balance, unless NCI has a binding obligation and is able to make good this deficit, in which case a different treatment involving that binding obligation would apply. Here, NCI's cumulative pre-loss balance of ₹8 lakh, reduced by its ₹12 lakh share of this year's loss, results in a deficit NCI balance of ₹8 lakh − ₹12 lakh = negative ₹4 lakh, and absent any binding obligation on NCI to fund this deficit, the full ₹12 lakh loss allocation is still attributed to NCI in full, producing this negative ₹4 lakh balance presented within equity (as a negative component of NCI), rather than disproportionately allocating the excess loss to the parent simply because NCI's existing balance was insufficient to absorb its full share; this reflects that NCI, as an equity holder, genuinely bears its proportionate share of the subsidiary's losses regardless of whether its existing equity stake happens to be large enough to absorb that share without going negative.

Question 5

A parent holds 80% of a subsidiary and purchases an additional 10% from NCI for ₹60 lakh in cash, retaining control throughout. At the date of this purchase, the carrying amount of the 10% NCI being acquired, based on the subsidiary's consolidated net assets at that date (including goodwill), is ₹45 lakh. Explain how this transaction should be accounted for in the consolidated financial statements.

Accepted Answer

Since the parent retains control of the subsidiary both before and after this purchase (moving from 80% to 90% ownership, still clearly controlling), this transaction is accounted for entirely as an equity transaction under Ind AS 110, with no gain or loss recognised in profit or loss and no adjustment made to the previously recognised goodwill. The carrying amount of NCI is adjusted to reflect the change in the parent's ownership interest, reducing NCI by the ₹45 lakh carrying amount attributable to the 10% interest acquired; the difference between the ₹60 lakh consideration paid and the ₹45 lakh carrying amount of NCI derecognised, ₹15 lakh, is recognised directly in equity, attributable to the owners of the parent, typically adjusting retained earnings or a separate equity reserve, rather than being recognised as an expense, a loss on acquisition, or an addition to goodwill in the consolidated statement of profit and loss; this equity-only treatment applies specifically because control itself has not changed hands, only the relative ownership split between the parent and NCI within an already-controlled subsidiary.

Question 6

A parent sells 40% of its 100%-owned subsidiary, retaining 60% but losing control as a result (the buyer, together with other factors, now has effective control). The consideration received for the 40% sold is ₹200 lakh. The retained 60% interest has a fair value of ₹280 lakh at the date control is lost. The subsidiary's net assets, including goodwill, had a carrying amount of ₹420 lakh immediately before this transaction. Compute the gain or loss on loss of control, and explain why this treatment differs from the change-in-ownership example above.

Accepted Answer

Gain or loss on loss of control = (Fair value of consideration received ₹200 lakh + Fair value of the retained interest ₹280 lakh) − Carrying amount of the subsidiary's net assets, including goodwill, ₹420 lakh = ₹480 lakh − ₹420 lakh = ₹60 lakh gain, recognised in profit or loss. This differs fundamentally from the earlier change-in-ownership example, where control was retained throughout and the transaction was treated purely as an equity transaction with no profit or loss impact at all; here, because control is genuinely lost as a result of the sale, Ind AS 110 requires the entire transaction to be treated as a disposal event: the subsidiary's assets, liabilities and any NCI are derecognised in full, the retained 60% interest is remeasured to its fair value at the date control is lost (rather than continuing to be carried at its previous consolidated carrying amount), and the resulting overall gain or loss, computed by comparing everything received or retained against everything given up, is recognised in profit or loss, reflecting that the parent's relationship with the (former) subsidiary has fundamentally changed in substance, from full control to a lesser form of influence, which the equity-transaction treatment for a mere ownership-percentage change while control is retained does not reflect at all.

Question 7

An investor acquires a 30% interest in an associate for ₹150 lakh. In the following year, the associate reports a profit of ₹40 lakh and pays a dividend of ₹10 lakh. Compute the carrying amount of the investment in the associate at the end of the year under the equity method, and the amount recognised in the investor's own profit or loss for the year.

Accepted Answer

Under the equity method, the investment is initially recognised at cost, ₹150 lakh, and subsequently adjusted for the investor's share of the associate's profit or loss, plus the associate's share here being 30% × ₹40 lakh = ₹12 lakh, recognised as a single-line 'share of profit of associate' in the investor's own profit or loss for the year, and reduced by the investor's share of any dividend received from the associate, 30% × ₹10 lakh = ₹3 lakh, since a dividend received represents a partial return of the investment rather than additional income already recognised through the share-of-profit line. Carrying amount at year end = ₹150 lakh (cost) + ₹12 lakh (share of profit) − ₹3 lakh (dividend received) = ₹159 lakh. The amount recognised in the investor's own profit or loss for the year is ₹12 lakh, the share of the associate's profit; the dividend received is not separately recognised as income at all under the equity method, since recognising it as income in addition to the share-of-profit line would double-count the same underlying economic benefit already captured when the associate's profit was recognised through the equity method adjustment.

Question 8

An investor holds a 35% interest in Company P, over which it has significant influence but not control, and a 60% interest in Company Q, over which it has control. Explain how each investment should be presented in the investor's consolidated financial statements, and why the two methods are not interchangeable.

Accepted Answer

Company P, over which the investor has significant influence but not control, is accounted for using the equity method under Ind AS 28, appearing in the investor's consolidated balance sheet as a single-line investment (initial cost adjusted for the investor's share of P's subsequent profit or loss and OCI, less dividends received), with a single-line share of P's profit or loss in the investor's own consolidated statement of profit and loss; none of P's individual assets, liabilities, revenues or expenses are combined line by line with the investor's own. Company Q, over which the investor has control, is fully consolidated under Ind AS 110, meaning every individual asset, liability, item of income and expense of Q is combined line by line with the investor's own, with NCI (the remaining 40% not owned by the investor) presented as a separate component of consolidated equity, and any intercompany transactions and balances between the investor and Q eliminated in full. The two methods are not interchangeable because they reflect fundamentally different economic relationships: control, which full consolidation reflects by presenting the group as if it were a single combined economic entity, is a materially stronger relationship than significant influence, which the equity method reflects through a single-line adjustment precisely because the investor does not have the power to direct Q's, sorry, P's, individual activities or dictate how its individual assets and liabilities are deployed, only an ability to participate in its financial and operating policy decisions.

Question 9

A parent acquires a subsidiary for ₹300 lakh cash upfront, plus a contingent obligation to pay an additional ₹50 lakh if the subsidiary achieves a specified revenue target within 2 years, classified as a financial liability. At acquisition, the fair value of this contingent obligation is estimated at ₹30 lakh. One year later, revised projections suggest the target is now highly likely to be achieved, and the liability's fair value is reassessed at ₹48 lakh. Explain how the initial goodwill computation and the subsequent remeasurement should each be treated.

Accepted Answer

At acquisition, the total consideration transferred for goodwill computation purposes includes both the ₹300 lakh cash and the acquisition-date fair value of the contingent consideration, ₹30 lakh, giving total consideration transferred of ₹330 lakh, which enters the goodwill formula as part of (a), the aggregate consideration, NCI and previously held interest, compared against the fair value of identifiable net assets acquired. One year later, the increase in the contingent liability's fair value from ₹30 lakh to ₹48 lakh, a ₹18 lakh increase, is a post-acquisition remeasurement of a liability classified as a financial liability, and Ind AS 103 explicitly requires such remeasurement to be recognised in profit or loss, not as an adjustment to goodwill; goodwill, once the measurement period has closed (or even within the measurement period, if this revision reflects a change in circumstances arising after acquisition rather than new information about facts existing at the acquisition date itself), is not adjusted for genuine post-acquisition changes in a contingent consideration liability's fair value, since goodwill is meant to reflect only what was known or knowable about the situation as it existed at the acquisition date, and a revenue target becoming more likely to be achieved due to the business's performance in the year following acquisition is a post-acquisition development, not new information about the acquisition-date fair value itself.

Question 10

A company already holds a 15% non-controlling equity investment in another entity, carried at fair value through profit or loss, with a carrying amount of ₹25 lakh. It then acquires a further 55% interest, obtaining control, for consideration of ₹210 lakh, at which point the fair value of the previously held 15% interest is reassessed at ₹32 lakh. Explain how the previously held interest should be treated in the business combination accounting, and the goodwill computation this produces (ignoring NCI, assuming the remaining 30% is measured using the proportionate share method and identifiable net assets fair value is ₹300 lakh).

Accepted Answer

In a step acquisition, where an entity obtains control of an investee in which it already held a non-controlling equity interest, Ind AS 103 requires the previously held equity interest to be remeasured to its acquisition-date fair value, ₹32 lakh, with the resulting gain of ₹32 lakh − ₹25 lakh = ₹7 lakh recognised in profit or loss (since the original investment was held at FVTPL, this remeasurement is treated consistently with how such gains are otherwise recognised for that classification) at the date control is obtained, rather than continuing to carry the previously held interest at its old carrying amount within the new combination. This remeasured fair value, ₹32 lakh, then enters the goodwill computation as the 'fair value of any previously held equity interest' component: Goodwill = (Consideration transferred ₹210 lakh + NCI measured under proportionate share method, 30% × ₹300 lakh = ₹90 lakh + Fair value of previously held interest ₹32 lakh) − Fair value of identifiable net assets ₹300 lakh = (₹210 + ₹90 + ₹32) − ₹300 = ₹332 − ₹300 = ₹32 lakh goodwill. This illustrates that a step acquisition is treated, in effect, as though the entity disposed of its old, smaller interest at fair value and simultaneously acquired the entire controlling stake afresh at that same date, rather than the earlier, smaller acquisition's original cost simply carrying forward unchanged into the larger combination.

Question 11

An investor holds only 40% of the voting shares of an investee, but the remaining 60% is held by numerous small, widely dispersed shareholders, none individually holding more than 3%, none of whom coordinate their voting, and the investor has consistently been able to direct the investee's relevant activities through its 40% stake at every shareholder meeting in recent years. Explain whether the investor controls the investee under Ind AS 110, despite holding less than a majority of voting rights.

Accepted Answer

Yes, the investor likely controls the investee despite holding only 40% of voting rights, because Ind AS 110 requires an assessment of control based on power over the investee, exposure or rights to variable returns, and the ability to use that power to affect those returns, and power does not require an absolute majority of voting rights where the investor's holding is large relative to the size and dispersion of other shareholdings, giving it de facto power. Here, the investor's 40% stake, compared against a remaining 60% held by numerous small, widely dispersed and uncoordinated shareholders, none individually or collectively likely to assemble sufficient votes to outvote the investor, together with the investor's demonstrated, consistent practical ability to direct the investee's relevant activities at every recent shareholder meeting, is strong evidence of de facto control — this is precisely the kind of substance-over-form, facts-and-circumstances assessment Ind AS 110 requires rather than a simple, mechanical majority-voting-rights test, and an investor in this position, having genuinely demonstrated an ongoing practical ability to direct the investee's activities, would be required to consolidate the investee as a subsidiary rather than treating its 40% stake merely as a significant influence investment accounted for under the equity method.

Question 12

A parent acquires 100% of a subsidiary for consideration of ₹180 lakh, while the fair value of the subsidiary's identifiable net assets at acquisition is ₹210 lakh. Explain how this should be treated, and the specific step Ind AS 103 requires before finalising this conclusion.

Accepted Answer

Since the fair value of identifiable net assets acquired, ₹210 lakh, exceeds the consideration transferred, ₹180 lakh, this is a bargain purchase, producing an excess of ₹30 lakh. Before recognising this as a gain, however, Ind AS 103 requires the acquirer to reassess whether it has correctly identified all of the assets acquired and all of the liabilities assumed, and to review the procedures used to measure the amounts to be recognised at the acquisition date for all these items as well as the consideration transferred; this reassessment step exists because a bargain purchase is an unusual outcome, more often explained by a measurement or identification error, such as an overlooked liability or an overstated asset fair value, than a genuine below-market acquisition, and Ind AS 103 requires this deliberate verification before the gain is accepted at face value. If, after this reassessment, the excess of ₹30 lakh is confirmed as genuine, it is recognised immediately as a gain in profit or loss on the acquisition date, unlike goodwill, which sits on the balance sheet as an asset rather than flowing through profit or loss at all.

Question 13

A target company being acquired has an internally developed, unregistered customer relationship base that it never recognised as an intangible asset on its own standalone books, since Ind AS 38 prohibits recognising such internally generated customer relationships. Explain whether this customer relationship should be recognised as a separate intangible asset in the acquirer's purchase price allocation, and why the answer differs from the target's own standalone treatment.

Accepted Answer

Yes, this customer relationship should be recognised as a separate identifiable intangible asset in the acquirer's purchase price allocation, provided it meets Ind AS 38's identifiability criterion (which customer relationships generally do, being either separable or arising from contractual/legal or, at minimum, sufficiently distinguishable non-contractual customer relationships) and can be reliably measured at its acquisition-date fair value. This differs from the target's own standalone treatment because Ind AS 38's prohibition on internally generated intangibles exists specifically because internally incurred development costs for such items cannot be reliably distinguished from the general cost of running the business; in a business combination, however, the acquirer is, in substance, separately identifying and paying for this customer relationship as part of the overall purchase price, and Ind AS 103 requires the acquirer to recognise identifiable intangible assets separately from goodwill at their acquisition-date fair value regardless of whether the acquiree itself ever recognised them, precisely because the acquisition itself provides the reliable, arm's-length, externally-observable valuation evidence that was missing when the target was developing the relationship internally.

Question 14

In a business combination, an acquired subsidiary's building is fair-valued upward by ₹60 lakh as part of the purchase price allocation, creating a taxable temporary difference (since the asset's tax base remains at its pre-acquisition carrying amount). The tax rate is 25%. Explain how this affects the goodwill computation.

Accepted Answer

The ₹60 lakh fair value uplift on the building creates a taxable temporary difference of ₹60 lakh (carrying amount now exceeding tax base by that amount), requiring recognition of a deferred tax liability of ₹60 lakh × 25% = ₹15 lakh as part of the identifiable liabilities assumed in the business combination, under Ind AS 12's ordinary temporary difference recognition principle, which applies to the assets and liabilities recognised in a business combination exactly as it would to any other recognition event. This ₹15 lakh deferred tax liability reduces the fair value of identifiable net assets acquired (since it is recognised as an additional liability alongside the building's higher fair value asset), which in turn increases the goodwill computed, since goodwill is the excess of consideration (and NCI, and any previously held interest) over the fair value of identifiable net assets, and a lower net asset figure (due to the added deferred tax liability) produces a correspondingly higher goodwill figure than would result if the deferred tax effect of the fair value uplift were overlooked entirely.

Question 15

A subsidiary values its inventory using the FIFO method, while its parent uses the weighted average method for its own inventory. Explain what adjustment, if any, is required before the subsidiary's financial statements can be combined with the parent's for consolidation purposes.

Accepted Answer

Ind AS 110 requires consolidated financial statements to be prepared using uniform accounting policies for like transactions and events in similar circumstances across the group; where a subsidiary's financial statements are prepared using accounting policies different from those adopted by the parent for similar transactions, appropriate adjustments must be made to the subsidiary's financial statements before consolidation to conform them to the parent's (group's) accounting policies. Here, since the subsidiary uses FIFO while the parent uses weighted average for inventory, the subsidiary's reported inventory and cost of goods sold figures must be restated to what they would have been had the subsidiary applied the weighted average method consistently with the parent, before the subsidiary's figures are combined line by line with the parent's own in the consolidation working; failing to make this adjustment would result in a consolidated inventory figure that is an inconsistent, internally incoherent mixture of two different valuation bases applied to different parts of the same combined group, undermining the comparability and faithful representation of the consolidated financial statements as presenting the group as a single economic entity.

Practice — Business Combinations and Consolidated Financial Statements

Sign in to save attempts to your dashboard and track your accuracy over time

Find a verified tutor

Join a live course

Browse coaching centres

About

Categories

Support

Documentation

Get Study Tips & Updates

Download Our App

Download for iOS

Download for Android

Popular Cities