Most common question in cross-border M&A deals involving India
The question I get most often from global investors, in-house teams, or international law firms revolves around: the transfer / issue of shares involving non-residents.
๐ฆ๐ผ๐บ๐ฒ ๐ฐ๐ผ๐บ๐บ๐ผ๐ป ๐๐ฒ๐ฟ๐๐ถ๐ผ๐ป๐ ๐ ๐ต๐ฒ๐ฎ๐ฟ:
โข โ๐๐ฐ ๐ธ๐ฆ ๐ฏ๐ฆ๐ฆ๐ฅ ๐๐๐ ๐ฐ๐ณ ๐๐๐๐ ๐ฐ๐ณ ๐ฐ๐ต๐ฉ๐ฆ๐ณ ๐ณ๐ฆ๐จ๐ถ๐ญ๐ข๐ต๐ฐ๐ณ๐บ ๐ข๐ฑ๐ฑ๐ณ๐ฐ๐ท๐ข๐ญ(๐ด) ๐ฃ๐ฆ๐ง๐ฐ๐ณ๐ฆ ๐ต๐ณ๐ข๐ฏ๐ด๐ง๐ฆ๐ณ๐ณ๐ช๐ฏ๐จ / ๐ช๐ด๐ด๐ถ๐ฆ ๐ด๐ฉ๐ข๐ณ๐ฆ๐ด ๐ต๐ฐ ๐ข ๐ฏ๐ฐ๐ฏ-๐ณ๐ฆ๐ด๐ช๐ฅ๐ฆ๐ฏ๐ต?
โข โ๐๐ฉ๐ข๐ต ๐ช๐ด ๐ต๐ฉ๐ฆ ๐ฑ๐ณ๐ฐ๐ค๐ฆ๐ด๐ด, ๐ฅ๐ฐ๐ค๐ถ๐ฎ๐ฆ๐ฏ๐ต๐ข๐ต๐ช๐ฐ๐ฏ ๐ข๐ฏ๐ฅ ๐ต๐ช๐ฎ๐ฆ๐ญ๐ช๐ฏ๐ฆ๐ด ๐ง๐ฐ๐ณ ๐ต๐ฉ๐ฆ ๐ด๐ข๐ฎ๐ฆโ
โข โ๐๐ต ๐ธ๐ฉ๐ข๐ต ๐ด๐ต๐ข๐จ๐ฆ ๐ฅ๐ฐ๐ฆ๐ด ๐ฐ๐ธ๐ฏ๐ฆ๐ณ๐ด๐ฉ๐ช๐ฑ ๐ข๐ค๐ต๐ถ๐ข๐ญ๐ญ๐บ ๐ฑ๐ข๐ด๐ด – ๐ฐ๐ฏ ๐ด๐ช๐จ๐ฏ๐ช๐ฏ๐จ, ๐ฑ๐ข๐บ๐ฎ๐ฆ๐ฏ๐ต, ๐ฐ๐ณ ๐๐ฐ๐ ๐ง๐ช๐ญ๐ช๐ฏ๐จ?โ
โข โ๐๐ฉ๐ฆ๐ต๐ฉ๐ฆ๐ณ ๐ข๐ค๐ฒ๐ถ๐ช๐ด๐ช๐ต๐ช๐ฐ๐ฏ / ๐ต๐ณ๐ข๐ฏ๐ด๐ง๐ฆ๐ณ ๐ธ๐ช๐ญ๐ญ ๐ต๐ณ๐ช๐จ๐จ๐ฆ๐ณ ๐ฐ๐ฑ๐ฆ๐ฏ ๐ฐ๐ง๐ง๐ฆ๐ณ?โ
โข โ๐๐ณ๐ฆ ๐ต๐ฉ๐ฆ๐ณ๐ฆ ๐ข๐ฏ๐บ ๐ฑ๐ณ๐ช๐ค๐ช๐ฏ๐จ ๐ณ๐ฆ๐ด๐ต๐ณ๐ช๐ค๐ต๐ช๐ฐ๐ฏ๐ด ๐ง๐ฐ๐ณ ๐ต๐ฉ๐ฆ ๐ฅ๐ฆ๐ข๐ญ?โ
The answer lies in the Companies Act, 2013, Indian foreign exchange control laws, SEBI norms, anti-trust laws and the Articles of Association, backed by the applicable secretarial process.
โข FEMA/RBI approval โ for transfer / issue of shares involving non-residents, where pricing or sectoral caps are breached, or where the transfer falls under the approval route (e.g., defence, telecom, insurance, etc.).
โข DPIIT or FDI nods โ when investments come from countries sharing land borders with India.
โข Competition Commission of India โ for combinations exceeding the prescribed asset or turnover thresholds.
โข Sectoral regulators (IRDAI, SEBI, RBI) โ in case of regulated entities like NBFCs, insurers, or listed companies.
A share transfer / issue may look procedural, but it is often the legal pivot point of an M&A deal. Gaps in approvals or filings can surface as due diligence red flags, delay deal closing, or even compromise ownership validity.
Having advised on multiple inbound and outbound deals, I have found that early regulatory mapping before signing can save weeks at closing.