Introduction
The world of digital assets has transformed from a niche interest into a significant market that impacts everyone from retail investors to exchanges, businesses, and even cross-border payments. In India, the government’s approach to cryptocurrencies and other virtual tokens has been both quick and unique: instead of trying to fit crypto earnings into existing tax categories, Parliament introduced a tailored tax system in the 2022 Finance Act. This new framework imposes a flat, high tax on income derived from “virtual digital assets” (VDAs) and includes a separate TDS reporting requirement. In this article, we’ll break down the legislation, explore how taxation works in practice, discuss compliance challenges, and delve into the ongoing legal and policy questions that the current framework raises.
Legislative skeletons: definitions and statutory provisions
India’s crypto tax architecture is based on three statutory pillars.
1. VDA definition
The definition of a “virtual digital asset” in the Income-tax Act (Section 2(47A)) is broad and technology-neutral: it covers cryptocurrencies, tokens, NFTs, and any other notified instruments, while also allowing the Central Government to exclude specific instruments by notification. This alteration to the definition creates a statutory category for tax purposes instead of general capital or business income rules determining the characterization.
2. Section 115BBH (30% flat tax).
Section 115BBH was introduced by the Finance Act, 2022, which taxes income obtained by the transfer of VDAs at the flat rate of 30% (plus applicable cess and surcharge). The provision applies “irrespective of whether such income is treated as capital gains or business income” under earlier classifications, thereby standardizing tax treatment across different taxpayer profiles. Deductions are restricted critically under this section-the taxpayer can generally only claim cost of acquisition and no other expenses related to the business in computing net income under this head.
3. Section 194S (1% TDS).
It prescribes 1% TDS on payments for transfer of VDAs by way of Section 194S in order to foster transparency and provide an audit trail, the threshold particulars and implementation rules of which have been specified in subsequent guidance. The TDS is to be deducted by the payer (for resident payees) and is a mechanism to facilitate the collection and reporting of transaction-level data. Reporting requirements for certain VDA service providers have also been incorporated into the compliance architecture.
How the tax applies in practice
Tax Incidence and Computation
Transfer of VDA under section 115BBH has a taxable event. Sale against fiat, swap with another cryptocurrency, exchange of tokens against goods/services and other dispositions that meet the criteria for transfer are treated as taxable events by the provision. The taxpayer calculates “income from transfer” as consideration minus cost of acquisition but does not allow other deductions (such as brokerage, platform fees, interest on funds used for trading, depreciation, etc.) under this head. Thus, often, a huge part of the effective tax bite becomes distorted for those frequently trading or running a business with high operational costs.
Last but not least, the rate of 30% shall apply whether or not the activity would have attracted tax treatment of capital gains or treated as business income; this demonstrates a policy approach that simplifies the statutory regime but could yield inequities. For example, a long term capital gains tax on other assets would have been lower.
TDS mechanics and thresholds
Under Section 194S, there’s a 1% TDS on the transfer of Virtual Digital Assets (VDAs). What this means in real life is that exchanges and payment platforms have been told to deduct this tax right when payments are made, especially once transactions hit certain thresholds. The guidance provided and the way platforms operate have included some practical thresholds for specific categories, making it easier for smaller transactions to comply. TDS acts as a way to collect tax in advance: that 1% is taken from the total amount and can be adjusted against what the taxpayer ultimately owes when they file their returns. Additionally, the Income-tax Department has shared some procedural guidance on how to deposit and report the TDS collected under Section 194S.
Non-allowance of set-off and carry forward of losses
One of the controversial and most critical features of the VDA taxation code is the restriction on set-offs. Losses from transfer of VDAs cannot be set off against other heads of income, and carry-forward/set-off rules are very tightly constrained-usually meaning that losses while trading in cryptocurrencies market cannot be set off against salary, business income or against capital gains from other assets. This condition is good for revenue tax certainty, but it is not beneficial to active market players who generally operate under volatility and incur very small losses many times. This rigidity in the ruling is quite inequitable, critics from various tax experts as well as industry views that it encourages the offshore migration of trading activities.
Reporting, compliance and enforcement
Collecting revenue is one of the two purposes of the government; tracing transactions is the other. To that end, therefore:
• Under financial and tax regulations, Indian crypto exchanges had to be reporting entities which required them to share transactional data both with tax authorities and compliance, in certain instances, with anti-money-laundering reporting obligations.
• The new income tax return schedules now include a separate head under which gains/losses from VDAs will be disclosed, hence streamlining money collection through self-reporting by taxpayers.
• Tax authorities have made an offensive in inquiry and enforcement, which follows a litany of routine assessment and issuing notices, as well as data-matching exercises to throw up several news reports on actions targeted at non-filers and undeclared gains.
The compliance measures have imposed very significant real costs on exchanges (KYC, record-keeping, and tax-reporting engines) and on taxpayers (reconciliation of transaction histories across wallets and platforms, foreign exchange considerations for cross-border trades). The 1% TDS, also meant as a tracker, in fact creates cash-flow frictions for individuals and reduces net liquidity on sale proceeds until adjusted in returns.
Legal, constitutional and policy issues
The views reflected are from the legal and policy perspective. In this context, some issues warrant attention.
1. Characterization and fairness. The Parliament’s decision to tax VDAs under a standalone provision reduces disputes about whether gains are capital or business in nature but diminishes other reliefs (like indexation for long-term holding) and treats vastly different economic activities from tax purposes (a hobby investor vs. a professional market-maker) the same. Such treatment raises questions of proportionality and distributive fairness.
2. Restriction on deductions and loss set-off. This blanket denial of deduction under the statute (other than cost of acquisition) and so limited rights for set-off may be held to be arbitrary if challenged before the courts—especially when the taxpayer can demonstrate business-like operations that incur real expenses attributable to earning VDA income.
3. Procedural fairness and TDS. The 1% TDS is an administrative mechanism, but it becomes harsh when excessive withholding occurs with delays in refund. Excessive TDS is treated as a collection mechanism by the courts, which can be claimed back in a return, but the practical obstacles faced by taxpayers, particularly those using multiple offshore wallets, hinder their ability to reconcile records.
4. Privacy and surveillance. Mandatory reporting and data-sharing by exchanges with tax/AML authorities raise privacy concerns; the law presently favors traceability, though proportional safeguards for data protection and limited access could be a matter of debate in the courts or Parliament.
Regulatory overlap and uncertainty. Thus, tax law exists side by side with the RBI and financial regulators’ considerations about payments, while ongoing policy work (including CBDT consultations and reports in the press about drafting a dedicated crypto code) signals possible future alignments. Until the emergence of a comprehensive regulatory statute, legal uncertainty continues for businesses.
Practical compliance tips for taxpayers and exchanges
For practitioners and taxpayers trying to wade through the existing regime, such practical steps are suggested:
• Keeping fine records. Maintain exchange statements, wallet-level CSVs (where available), timestamps, transaction hashes (also where possible), proof of acquisition costs (in INR or foreign currency), and records of swaps that could complicate computation.
• Reconcile amongst platforms. Traders very often operate on various domestic and offshore platforms. Reconciliation is critical both to arrive at correct consideration and to claim the credit of TDS deducted by various payers.
• Cash-flow planning. Keep 1% TDS against sale proceeds in mind; this should be part of cash-flow planning as refunds could consume time.
• Get expert advice for difficult situations. High-frequency trading, staking rewards, airdrops, forks, and DeFi interactions can trigger complex tax events where professional advice from tax experts acquainted with blockchain forensics would be necessary.
Stay updated. The CBDT and the Ministry of Finance keep issuing clarifications and amendments from time to time; every taxpayer should watch out for their official circulars and authoritative commentary.
Conclusion
India’s approach to cryptocurrencies—introducing defined Virtual Digital Assets (VDAs), a flat 30% tax on transfers, and a 1% Tax Deducted at Source (TDS) collection system—shows a clear preference for straightforwardness and enforceability rather than tax neutrality. This legal framework minimizes disputes over the nature of gains and establishes a dependable revenue stream, but it does come with downsides like reduced flexibility, possible inequities, and practical compliance challenges for those in the market. For those studying tax law and policy, the VDA framework serves as a real-time experiment: it explores how tax systems can adapt to borderless, programmable assets and whether the law can keep up without sacrificing fairness and economic growth. As we move ahead, the conversation will likely focus on whether the existing regulations safeguard taxpayers’ rights and market competitiveness while also addressing the government’s need for transparency and revenue—a delicate balance that lawmakers and policy-makers will need to keep fine-tuning.
Also Read:
Rights of undertrial prisoners in India
How To Send A Legal Notice In India
