VittSphere ONE Calculators Blog CA Prabhakar Kumar · FCA · ICAI 560762
Case lawCBDT Circulars & Instructions › Statutory position — section 194S: one per cent on payment for transfer of a VDA, from 1 July 2022
CBDT Circulars & InstructionsCuts both wayss.194Ss.2(47A)s.194-Os.203As.206AB

Statutory position — section 194S: one per cent on payment for transfer of a VDA, from 1 July 2022

We are paying for crypto bought from an Indian seller. Do we deduct tax, at what rate, and is there a threshold below which we can ignore it?

We are paying for crypto bought from an Indian seller. Do we deduct tax, at what rate, and is there a threshold below which we can ignore it?

Yes, from 1 July 2022. Section 194S requires any person responsible for paying a resident any sum by way of consideration for transfer of a virtual digital asset to deduct one per cent of that sum, at the time of credit to the resident's account or at the time of payment, whichever is earlier. No tax is deducted where the payer is a 'specified person' and the value or aggregate value of the consideration does not exceed Rs 50,000 during the financial year, or where the payer is anyone else and it does not exceed Rs 10,000 during the financial year. Where the consideration is wholly in kind, or is a swap of one VDA for another, or the cash part is not enough to fund the deduction, the payer must ensure the tax has been paid BEFORE releasing the consideration.

Decided by the CBDT Circulars & Instructions (Not applicable — statutory text) on 2022-07-01, reported as Income-tax Act 1961, s.194S; inserted by the Finance Act 2022 (Act No. 6 of 2022), w.e.f. 1-7-2022; sub-section (2) substituted in part by the Finance Act 2025 (Act No. 7 of 2025), w.e.f. 1-4-2025. It bears on section 194S, section 2(47A), section 194-O, section 203A, section 206AB of the Income Tax Act 1961, in Crypto & Virtual Digital Assets and TDS Defaults matters.

Still good law. In force from 1 July 2022. The only amendment located is in sub-section (2): the Department's Year-2025 page records 'Sub. for "sections 203A and 206AB" by Act No. 7 of 2025, w.e.f. 1-4-2025', so from 1 April 2025 the sub-section disapplies only s.203A to a specified person. The rate, the thresholds and the in-kind proviso are unchanged across the Year-2022, Year-2023 and Year-2025 versions of the page. A search of indiankanoon for Tribunal decisions on s.194S returned exactly one order, Raunaq Prakash Jain v ITO (ITAT Jodhpur, 28 November 2024), which the library already holds; there is effectively no case law on the section. I did NOT read CBDT Circulars 13/2022 or 14/2022 on this pass and I did not check the corresponding provision of the Income-tax Act 2025.

Why it matters

Three features of this section catch people out. First, the in-kind proviso: a coin-for-coin swap is within the section, and because there is no cash to deduct from, the obligation converts into a duty to satisfy yourself that the tax has been paid before you release the consideration — that is why exchanges operate the deduction at their own level. Second, sub-section (4) resolves the overlap with s.194-O in favour of s.194S: where both would apply to a transaction, tax is deducted under s.194S(1), not under s.194-O. Third, the 'specified person' definition is not about the seller but about the PAYER — an individual or HUF whose business turnover did not exceed Rs 1 crore or professional gross receipts Rs 50 lakh in the immediately preceding financial year, or an individual or HUF with no income under the head profits and gains of business or profession. For such a payer the higher Rs 50,000 threshold applies and, by sub-section (2), s.203A does not apply, so no TAN is needed. Note a recent and easily missed change: sub-section (2) originally disapplied 'sections 203A and 206AB' to a specified person, and the words were substituted by the Finance Act 2025 with effect from 1 April 2025 so that only s.203A is now referred to. Sub-section (5) deems a credit to a suspense account to be a credit to the payee, which closes the obvious avoidance route. Sub-sections (6) and (7) are the source of the Board's guidelines, which are binding on income-tax authorities and on the payer. The guideline circular identified in the reported material read on this pass is CBDT Circular No. 13/2022 dated 22 June 2022, named in the ITAT Surat order in Ankit Kabra v ITO; the library also holds a separate entry for CBDT Circular 14/2022, whose text I did not read on this pass and about whose contents and enabling provision nothing is asserted here.

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.