ITAT 關於比特幣徵稅的命令：這意味著什麼以及誰將受益

最近，所得稅上訴法庭 (ITAT) 在涉及價值千萬美元的比特幣銷售案件中發布了一項命令，這項命令引起了社群媒體的熱烈討論。

Social media has been abuzz with a recent Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) order in a case involving the sale of Bitcoins worth crores. In an order dated November 28, 2024, the ITAT ruled that Bitcoins sold by a taxpayer in assessment year (AY) 2021-22 qualified as capital assets for taxation purposes. Thus, it allowed him to avail long-term capital gains (LTCG) tax benefits. Following this order, several crypto enthusiasts on social media claimed that the ITAT order has changed cryptocurrency taxation rules in India. But this is not true. Experts say it was a case-specific order, which will not benefit taxpayers selling crypto assets, including Bitcoin, today. Even those who sold crypto after the implementation of the Finance Act 2022 will not benefit from the order. "The ITAT judgment will not hold good for the sale/transfer of cryptos today. The Tribunal's decision pertains to AY 2021-22 and is applicable only to transactions that occurred prior to the Finance Act 2022 as virtual digital assets (VDAs) were not defined in the law during that period," says CA (Dr.) Suresh Surana. How is crypto taxed now? The Finance Act 2022 introduced Section 115BBH, which specifically defined VDAs. It also implemented a flat 30% tax on proceeds from the sale of cryptocurrencies. Further, no deduction (other than the cost of acquisition) and set-off of losses from one VDA against any other VDA are allowed. What was the case before ITAT? Raunaq Prakash Jain (the assessee) had purchased Bitcoins worth Rs.5.05 lakh and sold them after more than 36 months in AY 2020-21 for Rs.6.69 crore. While filing taxes, he treated this income as LTCG. The Income Tax Assessing officer and the First Appellate Authority (FAA) rejected such treatment, saying Bitcoin was not defined as a capital asset under the Income Tax Act. However, the ITAT accepted Jain's claim. Do ITAT orders qualify as tax rules? No, ITAT orders are not tax rules but decisions specific to the cases brought before the Tribunal. Experts say these orders are not binding on other taxpayers or cases. And they may also be subject to appeal before the High Court and the Supreme Court. “ITAT orders are binding on lower authorities within the same jurisdiction but are not binding nationwide unless upheld by higher courts,” says Pallav Pradyumn Narang, Partner, CNK, a Delhi-based law firm. Income tax rules in India are framed by the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) and governed by the Income Tax Act. “While ITAT rulings do not automatically become tax rules, they hold persuasive value for similar cases, especially when there is no contrary decision by a higher court,” Narang adds. Who will benefit from the ITAT order? The ITAT decision may benefit only those taxpayers facing a situation similar to Jain's case. “This decision is specific to the facts of the case and will only be useful for taxpayers with similar fact patterns. With the introduction of specific tax provisions for VDAs applicable to transactions post-2022, the benefits associated with classification as capital assets are no longer available,” says Kunal Savani, Partner, Cyril Amarchand Mangaldas. However, the order may also be seen as a precedent for similar cases. "This judgment certainly will be a precedent for income tax cases and a transfer of cryptocurrencies up to AY 2023-24 cannot be subjected to income from other sources given this judgment," says Kishore Kunal, Advocate on Record, Supreme Court of India.

最近，所得稅上訴法庭 (ITAT) 在涉及價值千萬美元的比特幣銷售案件中發布了一項命令，這項命令引起了社群媒體的熱烈討論。在 2024 年 11 月 28 日的命令中，ITAT 裁定納稅人在 2021-22 評估年 (AY) 出售的比特幣符合稅務目的的資本資產。因此，這使他能夠享受長期資本利得（LTCG）稅收優惠。繼該命令之後，社交媒體上的幾位加密貨幣愛好者聲稱 ITAT 命令改變了印度的加密貨幣稅收規則。但事實並非如此。專家表示，這是一項針對具體情況的命令，不會讓如今出售包括比特幣在內的加密資產的納稅人受益。即使是那些在《2022 年金融法案》實施後出售加密貨幣的人也不會從該命令中受益。 「ITAT 的判決不適用於今天的加密貨幣銷售/轉讓。法庭的裁決​​適用於 2021-22 財年，僅適用於 2022 年金融法之前發生的交易，因為虛擬數位資產 (VDA) 尚未定義在那段在時期的法律中，」CA (Dr.) Suresh Surana 說。現在加密貨幣如何課稅？ 《2022 年金融法》引入了第 115BBH 條，其中具體定義了 VDA。它還對加密貨幣銷售收入徵收 30% 的統一稅。此外，不允許從一個 VDA 扣除任何其他 VDA 的損失（採購成本除外）或抵銷損失。 ITAT之前的情況是怎麼樣的？ Raunaq Prakash Jain（評估者）購買了價值 50.5 萬盧比的比特幣，並在 36 個多月後於 2020-21 財年以 66.9 億盧比的價格出售。在報稅時，他將這筆收入視為 LTCG。所得稅評估官和第一上訴機構（FAA）拒絕了這種待遇，稱比特幣沒有根據所得稅法被定義為資本資產。不過，ITAT 接受了 Jain 的主張。 ITAT 訂單是否符合稅務規則？不，ITAT 命令不是稅務規則，而是針對提交法庭的案件的具體決定。專家表示，這些命令對其他納稅人或案件沒有約束力。他們也可能會向高等法院和最高法院提出上訴。德里律師事務所 CNK 合夥人 Pallav Pradyumn Narang 表示：“ITAT 命令對同一管轄範圍內的下級當局具有約束力，但在全國範圍內不具有約束力，除非得到上級法院的支持。”印度的所得稅規則由中央直接稅委員會 (CBDT) 制定，並受《所得稅法》管轄。 「雖然 ITAT 的裁決不會自動成為稅務規則，但它們對類似案件具有說服力，特別是在上級法院沒有做出相反裁決的情況下，」Narang 補充道。誰將從 ITAT 命令中受益？ ITAT 的決定可能只會使那些面臨與 Jain 案件類似情況的納稅人受益。 「這項決定是針對案件事實的，僅對具有類似事實模式的納稅人有用。隨著適用於 2022 年之後交易的 VDA 特定稅收規定的出台，與資本資產分類相關的好處將不再可用。不過，該命令也可以被視為類似案件的先例。印度最高法院記錄在案的律師 Kishore Kunal 表示：“這一判決無疑將成為所得稅案件的先例，並且在 2023-24 財年之前的加密貨幣轉讓不能受到來自其他來源的收入的影響。”