📚 PASS Investment Adviser (Level 2) Difficulty: Intermediate ℹ️ Info   ~5 min read
📌 Chapter 11.8 — Bonus Stripping

As an analyst reviewing a high-net-worth client’s portfolio, you encounter a situation where an artificial loss was disallowed under Section 94(8) of the Income Tax Act. While the immediate impulse is to simply ignore the loss for the current assessment year, the real work begins when analyzing the deferred tax impact on the remaining bonus units.

When the regulator strikes down a loss from a bonus-stripping transaction, that specific amount does not vanish into thin air; rather, it attaches itself to the cost of acquisition of the bonus units that were held during the disposal. This mechanism is essentially a tax-neutralization exercise that shifts the basis of the asset.

From a valuation and tax-planning perspective, this adjustment is crucial because it alters the future capital gains liability. If you are building a wealth-preservation model for a client, you must correctly identify the ‘indexed cost of acquisition’ for the bonus units once they are finally liquidated. By adding the disallowed loss to the bonus shares, the law effectively lowers the capital gain when those units are eventually sold, or increases the loss, thereby aligning the tax outcome with the economic reality of the investment journey.

Consider an investor who bought 100 shares at Rs. 1,000 each and received 100 bonus shares shortly after. If the investor sells the original shares at Rs. 600, triggering a Rs. 40,000 loss that is disallowed under Section 94(8), this Rs. 40,000 is added to the cost of the 100 bonus shares. If the original cost of those bonus units was zero, their new cost of acquisition for tax purposes becomes Rs. 40,000.

When the investor eventually sells the bonus shares at Rs. 900 each (total Rs. 90,000), the taxable gain is not the full Rs. 90,000, but rather Rs. 50,000 (Rs. 90,000 minus the adjusted cost of Rs. 40,000).

For investment advisers, this implies that record-keeping is not merely an administrative chore but a strategic component of tax alpha. Neglecting to track these adjusted costs means you might overestimate a client’s future tax liability in your projections, leading to suboptimal portfolio decisions or unnecessary liquidations. Always integrate these tax-adjusted cost bases into your long-term return models to provide an accurate picture of post-tax cash flows. Mastery of these adjustments distinguishes a superficial adviser from one who truly protects their client’s terminal wealth.

Nuance

⚠️ Nuance
A common pitfall is the assumption that the disallowed loss disappears entirely, leading candidates to erroneously calculate future gains based on the original cost of zero. In reality, the tax code treats the disallowed loss as a ‘capitalized cost’ of the retained asset. Analysts often miss that this adjustment can be the difference between a high short-term tax hit and a mitigated long-term liability, making the documentation of the ‘disallowed’ status vital for future tax reporting.

Check Your Understanding

Practice Question 1

An investor acquires 500 shares at Rs. 200 per share and receives 500 bonus shares. The investor sells the original 500 shares for Rs. 150 each within three months of the record date, incurring a loss of Rs. 25,000. Under Section 94(8), this loss is disallowed. If the investor sells the 500 bonus shares two years later for Rs. 300 per share, what is the cost of acquisition for tax purposes?

Practice Question 2

How does the inclusion of the disallowed loss into the bonus shares’ cost of acquisition affect the long-term capital gain (LTCG) calculation upon their eventual sale?

This is a companion read for Section 11.8 — Bonus Stripping from PASS Investment Adviser (Level 2) by Akhilesh Gururani, available on Amazon Kindle.

Copyright © 2026 Akhilesh Gururani. All rights reserved.