Blockchain 2025 Comparisons

Last Updated June 12, 2025

Contributed By JSA Advocates & Solicitors

Law and Practice

Authors

Probir Roy Chowdhury
Nikhil George

JSA Advocates & Solicitors is a leading full-service Indian law firm with a substantial national footprint, including key offices in Mumbai, Delhi, Bengaluru, Chennai, Gurugram, Hyderabad and Ahmedabad. JSA has a team of over 600 legal professionals and a dedicated fintech practice within its technology, media and telecommunications (TMT) practice group. JSA regularly advises on the regulatory landscape for virtual digital assets in India, including assisting cryptocurrency exchanges with market entry strategies and counselling blockchain-based businesses on compliance and structuring. JSA’s key clients in the virtual digital assets sector include a large Indian cryptocurrency custodial exchange and financial services platform; a multinational digital media streaming platform with an NFT vertical; a multinational ad-tech, social media and online gaming platform with an NFT vertical; and one of the world’s largest technology conglomerates, which offers, amongst other things, cloud-based blockchain and cryptocurrency services.

The blockchain market in India has been rapidly growing, despite facing challenges from the government of India and certain regulators. While there were concerns about the government potentially prohibiting/banning the blockchain market, it is now clear that it is here to stay. 

That said, the blockchain market has been affected by the hack against the cryptocurrency exchange WazirX, which wiped out USD325 million and affected 15 million investors in 2024 – and is currently subject to ongoing litigation. There has also been litigation initiated against the cryptocurrency exchange BitBNS over allegations that users have been unable to withdraw funds from their wallets since a cyber-attack that took place in 2022.

The regulatory framework around the Indian blockchain market is scattered, with certain regulators issuing piecemeal regulations particularly focused on tax and money laundering. However, there has been pressure on Indian banking and securities regulators to formulate an overarching framework to regulate the blockchain market, which will likely set the tone for the market over the next 12–24 months. 

The blockchain market in India today is primarily focused on blockchain-based investments and trading activities. Blockchain technology-based payment is not a major business model, particularly since cryptocurrency is not a widely accepted payment method.

Most popular cryptocurrency exchange platforms in India operate as custodial exchanges and offer a variety of financial products related to cryptocurrencies and other digital assets, such as non-fungible tokens (NFTs). Many cryptocurrency exchange platforms also facilitate person-to-person (P2P) cryptocurrency-fiat transactions, where the cryptocurrency exchange platform serves as an escrow agent in order to hold cryptocurrency in escrow until the purchaser-to-seller fiat transaction can be confirmed. This model of P2P transactions became especially popular in India because, until recently, Indian banks did not support fiat transactions related to cryptocurrency.

Ownership of a digital asset based on a blockchain network is determined solely based on general contract law. India does not have blockchain-specific regulations to determine the finality of the transfer of a digital asset via a blockchain network. Therefore, a digital asset would be considered transferred on the basis of contractually agreed parameters/the blockchain network protocol.

India’s Information Technology Act, 2000 (the “Information Technology Act”) legally recognises the validity of contracts formed through electronic means, stating that:

“Where in a contract formation, the communication of proposals, the acceptance of proposals, the revocation of proposals and acceptances, as the case may be, are expressed in electronic form or by means of an electronic record, such contract shall not be deemed to be unenforceable solely on the ground that such electronic form or means was used for that purpose”.

Therefore, blockchain-based contracts and transactions will be considered valid under Indian law, provided such contracts/transactions meet general requirements related to valid contracts – ie, offer and acceptance based on free will and lawful consideration and objects.

Indian law currently does not distinguish between digital assets based on a blockchain network. All digital assets on a blockchain network are subject to similar treatment under law, irrespective of their nature. Applicable regulations are not concerned with the nature of the digital asset, instead being primarily focused on income tax, prevention of money laundering and cybersecurity relating to digital assets.

The Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI), which regulates publicly traded Indian securities, currently does not have regulations for tokenised securities. Consequently, tokenised securities are not specifically classified or regulated under Indian law. However, SEBI does not permit publicly traded entities to tokenise their listed securities.

Stablecoins are also not specifically regulated under Indian law, and would be treated in the same manner as any other digital asset based on a blockchain network.

NFTs and other digital assets are also treated uniformly under applicable law in India.

Cryptocurrencies are not legal tender in India (other than the central bank digital currency of the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) – ie, fiat Indian rupees issued by the RBI in crypto form on a blockchain network, which will not be covered in this chapter). Legal tender must be accepted by the recipient as consideration to discharge a debt or financial obligation.

However, there is no restriction of the use of cryptocurrencies as consideration in a contract, since the consideration required to conclude a contract need not be cash or other forms of legal tender. That said, since cryptocurrencies are not legal tender, the recipient must agree to accept cryptocurrency as legal tender for the purpose of discharging the payer’s debt or obligation with respect to such contract.

Therefore, in theory, cryptocurrencies can be used to make payments. However, practically, there are challenges in using cryptocurrencies to make payments – particularly in view of the fact that the recipient of the cryptocurrency will be required to deduct 1% of the value of the cryptocurrency and deposit the same with tax authorities in favour of the payer.

There are no legal/regulatory issues relating to the use of digital assets in collateral arrangements in India. However, it is uncommon for banks and non-banking financial companies in India to issue loans secured against digital assets.

Smart contracts – ie, private contractual arrangements made in whole or in part by utilising agreed-upon computer code that executes across multiple “nodes” on a blockchain network – are enforceable under Indian law.

As discussed in the foregoing, the Information Technology Act recognises the validity of contracts formed through electronic means, as long as they are based on an offer and acceptance (involving free consent) with lawful consideration and objects. That said, Indian law requires all contracts to be stamped. Contracts that are not stamped are not admissible before a court of law and, consequently, would not be enforceable. Therefore, it is recommended that applicable stamp duty also be paid on smart contracts.

The blockchain market in India is currently regulated under three separate frameworks – the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the “Income Tax Act”), the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (the “Prevention of Money Laundering Act”) and Directions by the Indian Computer Emergency Response Team, 2022 (the “CERT-In Cyber Security Directions”)

Each of these frameworks is particularly focused on virtual digital assets (VDAs) – ie, cryptocurrencies and NFTs – defined under the Income Tax Act as “(a) any information or code or number or token (not being Indian currency or foreign currency), generated through cryptographic means or otherwise, by whatever name called, providing a digital representation of value exchanged with or without consideration, with the promise or representation of having inherent value, or functions as a store of value or a unit of account including its use in any financial transaction or investment, but not limited to investment scheme; and can be transferred, stored or traded electronically; (b) a non-fungible token or any other token of similar nature, by whatever name called; (c) any other digital asset, as the Central Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette specify”.

Notably, the Finance Bill, 2025 seeks to expand the definition of VDA from 1 April 2026 to include “(d) any crypto-asset being a digital representation of value that relies on a cryptographically secured distributed ledger or a similar technology to validate and secure transactions, whether or not such asset is included in sub-clause (a) or sub-clause (b) or sub-clause (c)”.

Income Tax Act

The taxability of VDAs under the Income Tax Act is discussed in detail in 6. Tax.

Prevention of Money Laundering Act

The Prevention of Money Laundering Act regulates entities that engage in the following activities when carried out for or on behalf of another natural or legal person in the course of business:

  • exchange between VDAs and fiat currencies;
  • exchange between one or more forms of VDA;
  • transfer of VDAs;
  • safekeeping or administration of VDAs or instruments enabling control over VDAs; and
  • participating in and providing financial services related to an issuer’s offer and sale of a VDA.

The Prevention of Money Laundering Act applies equally to foreign companies where any of the above-mentioned activities occur outside India, to the extent that there is any nexus between such activities and India (eg, if they have customers in India). The Financial Intelligence Unit – India (FIU-IND) has clarified that VDA service providers operating in India (both offshore and onshore) and engaged in activities such as (i) exchange between VDAs and fiat currencies; (ii) transfer of VDAs; (ii) safekeeping or administration of VDAs; or (iv) instruments enabling control over VDAs are required to be registered with FIU-IND as “reporting entities” (REs), and to comply with the obligations mandated under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act. This obligation is activity-based and is not contingent on having a physical presence in India.

CERT-In Cyber Security Directions

The CERT-In Cyber Security Directions apply to:

  • virtual asset (ie, VDA) service providers;
  • exchange providers; and
  • custodial wallet providers.

The CERT-In Directions apply to entities located in India, and to those located outside India that have a territorial nexus to India (eg, if they render services to Indian customers). CERT-In has clarified that the CERT-In Directions are applicable to foreign firms that service Indian customers.

Entities engaged in the above activities are required to verify the identities of their users (KYC) and maintain KYC records for a period of five years. With respect to transaction records, such entities are required to maintain accurate information in a way that individual transactions can be reconstructed along with relevant elements, comprising information relating to identification of the relevant parties including:

  • IP addresses along with time stamps and time zones;
  • transaction IDs;
  • public keys (or equivalent identifiers);
  • the addresses or accounts involved (or equivalent identifiers);
  • the nature and date of the transaction; and
  • the amount transferred.

An RE must register with FIU-IND to comply with its obligations under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act. To do so, the RE will need to set up an in-person meeting at the office of FIU-IND after submitting the following documents/information thereto:

  • a note on the RE’s services and an explanation as to how its activities fall within the ambit of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act;
  • a note on the RE’s corporate structure along with details of any significant beneficial ownership in the RE’s corporate structure;
  • copies of the RE’s incorporation documents, annual returns, balance sheet and profit and loss account filed with the Indian Ministry of Corporate Affairs in the past three financial years;
  • copies of goods and services tax returns filed in the past three years;
  • copies of income tax returns under the Income Tax Act;
  • details of arrangements involving entities based in and outside of India with respect to the registering entity’s VDA activities, along with copies of agreements relating to the same;
  • a self-declaration that there are no criminal cases or proceedings by the Enforcement Directorate of India or any other law enforcement authority against the registering entity or its directors;
  • a signed “fit-and-proper” certificate (provided by FIU-IND);
  • a duly filled AML/combating the financing of terrorism (CFT) questionnaire (provided by FIU-IND); and
  • any other information requested by FIU-IND.

FIU-IND is empowered to request any information/document it deems necessary to complete the registration process, and it can deny registration if it finds that the registering entity is not compliant with the Prevention of Money Laundering Act.

Advertisements of digital assets are not regulated in India. However, the Advertising Standards Council of India (ASCI), a self-regulatory body for advertisers, has published the Code for Self-Regulation in Advertising (the “ASCI Code”), which covers advertisements relating to digital assets. Advertisements broadcast over television networks are required to be compliant with the ASCI Code. Additionally, most large digital advertisement platforms are ASCI members bound by the ASCI Code.

The ASCI Code requires its members to ensure that advertisements for digital assets carry the following disclaimer:

“Crypto products and NFTs are unregulated and can be highly risky. There may be no regulatory recourse for any loss from such transactions”.

Additionally, the ASCI Code requires its members to comply with the following obligations in relation to advertisements of digital assets.

  • Disclaimers must be made in the following manner so that they are prominent and unmissable for the average consumer.
    1. If in print or static, disclaimers must be displayed equal to at least one-fifth of the advertising space at the bottom of the advertisement in an easy-to-read font, against a plain background and in the maximum font size afforded by the space.
    2. If in video format, disclaimers must be placed at the end of the advertisement against a plain background. A voiceover must accompany the disclaimer in text. The voiceover should be at a normal speaking pace and must not be hurried. In the case of long format video of over two minutes, said disclaimer should be repeated at the beginning and end of the video. The disclaimer must remain on screen for a minimum of five seconds.
    3. If in audio, the disclaimer must be spoken at the end of the advertisement. The voiceover should be at a normal speaking pace and must not be hurried. In the case of long-format audio of over 90 seconds, said disclaimer should be repeated at the beginning and end of the audio.
    4. If in a social media post, the disclaimer must be carried in both the caption and any picture or video attachments. The disclaimer within the caption must be placed upfront at the beginning of the post. Where social media posts or advertisements place restrictions on text in the static picture, the disclaimer must be carried upfront in the caption before the fold.
    5. If in a disappearing story or post accompanied by text, the disclaimer will need to be voiced at the end of the story. If the video is 15 seconds or less, then the disclaimer may be carried in a prominent and visible manner as an overlay.
    6. In formats where there is a limit on characters, the following shortened disclaimer must be used: “Crypto products and NFTs are unregulated and risky”. This disclaimer must also be followed by a link to the full disclaimer.
    7. The disclaimer must be made in the dominant language of the advertisement.
  • The words “currency”, “securities”, “custodian” and “depositories” must not be used in advertisements of digital assets as consumers associate these terms with regulated products.
  • The information contained in advertisements must not contradict the information or warnings that entities provide to customers in the marketing of digital assets.
  • Advertisements that provide information on the cost or profitability of digital assets must contain clear, accurate, sufficient and updated information. For example, “zero cost” will need to include all costs that the consumer might reasonably associate with the offer or transaction.
  • Information on past performance must not be provided in a partial or biased manner. Returns for periods shorter than 12 months must not be included.
  • Every advertisement for digital assets must clearly state the name of the advertiser and provide an easy way to contact them (phone number or email). This information should be presented in a manner that is easily understandable for the average consumer.
  • No advertisement for digital assets or exchanges may show a minor, or someone who appears to be a minor, directly using or talking about the product.
  • No advertisement may show that digital assets or trading could be a solution to money problems, personal problems or other such negative circumstances.
  • No advertisement may contain statements that promise or guarantee a future increase in profits.
  • No advertisement may show that understanding digital assets is so easy that consumers do not have to think twice about investing. Nothing in the ad should downplay the risks associated with the category.
  • Digital assets must not be compared to any other regulated asset class.
  • Since digital assets are considered risky, celebrities or prominent personalities who appear in digital asset advertisements must take special care to ensure that they have done their due diligence about the statements and claims made in the advertisement, so as not to mislead consumers.

The Prevention of Money Laundering Act requires REs to register with FIU-IND and:

  • conduct KYC of their clients, and such clients’ beneficial owners, in the manner prescribed under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act;
  • appoint a designated director and principal officer for implementation and compliance with the Prevention of Money Laundering Act;
  • maintain records of all transactions and submit transaction information to FIU-IND;
  • monitor and flag suspicious transactions (including transactions that may involve terrorist financing) to FIU-IND;
  • retain transaction records for at least five years;
  • retain KYC records for at least five years from the date the business relationship with the client ends;
  • provide FIU-IND with access to any information deemed necessary for the purpose of complying with the Prevention of Money Laundering Act;
  • comply with guidelines and instructions of FIU-IND that relate to AML/CFT and sanctions; and
  • implement group-wide policies for AML and CFT.

In view of the fact that FIU-IND registration of an RE is based on its corporate structure (including any beneficial interest), it would be advisable to appraise FIU-IND within seven days of any changes to the same.

There are no specific resolution or insolvency requirements/regimes for digital asset firms in India.

Digital asset firms will be subject to the standard corporate insolvency resolution process applicable to all corporate entities under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. Digital assets in a corporate insolvency resolution process will be treated as property/assets and may be liquidated to pay off the debts of the insolvent entity.

There are no other applicable regulatory requirements in this jurisdiction.

While there is no restriction on the exposure to digital assets of entities regulated by the RBI, it would be advisable for such entities to refrain from any such exposure in view of the RBI’s negative stance on digital assets. The RBI has reportedly informally instructed its regulated entities to ensure that they do not facilitate transactions involving digital assets.

SEBI-regulated entities (such as mutual funds and alternative investment funds) are currently not permitted to have exposure to digital assets.

There are currently no regulatory sandboxes in India geared towards non-government-driven, blockchain-based projects.

India has implemented the Financial Action Task Force’s Recommendation 16 (Travel Rule) by requiring VDA service providers to register with and report VDA transactions to FIU-IND under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act. The AML & CFT Guidelines for Reporting Entities Providing Services Related to Virtual Digital Assets issued by FIU-IND specifically reference the Travel Rule and state that VDA service providers must ensure they include “required and accurate originator information, and required beneficiary information, on wire transfers and related messages”.

Further, VDA service providers are also required to monitor wire transfers to detect those that lack the required originator and/or beneficiary information, and to screen transactions to ensure compliance with United Nations Security Council Resolution (UNSCR) resolutions.

The information required to be obtained and held relating to such transfers includes:

  • the originator’s permanent account number or national identity number;
  • the originator’s name;
  • the originator’s account number used to process the transaction (ie, their wallet address);
  • the originator’s physical (geographical) address, which uniquely identifies the originator with respect to the ordering institution, or their date and place of birth;
  • the beneficiary’s name; and
  • the beneficiary’s account number used to process the transaction (ie, their wallet address).

India’s central bank, the RBI (which regulates banking and payments) – and the securities regulator, SEBI – have been reluctant to specifically regulate tokens/VDAs based on their nature as currency, securities, etc.

However, in response to a petition filed before the Delhi High Court by users calling for the regulation of VDAs, in January 2025, the Delhi High Court sought responses from the RBI, SEBI and the Ministry of Finance (MoF) for their views on the regulation of VDAs. It is currently unclear whether these regulators and/or the MoF will take a clear stance on VDAs as a result of this petition.

There are no legally recognised self-regulatory bodies in India that perform regulatory or quasi-regulatory roles with respect to businesses or individuals using blockchain in the country.

In 2017, a high-level committee, the Inter-Ministerial Committee (IMC), was constituted to study issues relating to cryptocurrency and to recommend regulatory action. Thereafter, in 2019, the IMC proposed the Banning of Cryptocurrency & Regulation of Official Digital Currency Bill 2019 (the “2019 Crypto Bill”), which sought to prohibit the mining, generation, holding, selling, dealing, issuance, transfer, disposal and use of cryptocurrency in India.

While the 2019 Crypto Bill was never enacted as law, entry 12 of the list of bills to be introduced in Lok Sabha (the Indian lower house of the Indian Parliament), published in the Lok Sabha Bulletin – Part II, dated 29 January 2021, made reference to the Cryptocurrency and Regulation of Official Digital Currency Bill, 2021 (the “2021 Crypto Bill”). The purpose of the 2021 Crypto Bill was to “create a facilitative framework for creation of the official digital currency to be issued by the Reserve Bank of India. The Bill also seeks to prohibit all private cryptocurrencies in India, however, it allows for certain exceptions to promote the underlying technology of cryptocurrency and its uses”.

Therefore, while the 2021 Crypto Bill had dropped the word “Banning” from its title, this change was mere form over substance. The principal intent of the 2021 Crypt Bill appeared very similar to that of the 2019 Crypto Bill – ie, to prohibit private cryptocurrencies.

Notably, the 2021 Crypto Bill was expected to be taken up by the Indian Parliament in December 2021. However, the 2021 Crypto Bill has not yet been officially presented before the Indian Parliament, and there have been no further developments in this regard since 2021.

In 2018, the RBI had sought to prohibit its regulated entities (such as banks and payment systems) from facilitating transactions involving cryptocurrencies, resulting in fiat-cryptocurrency transactions grinding to a halt.

The RBI directive was challenged before the Supreme Court of India in the 2020 case of Internet and Mobile Association of India v Reserve Bank of India (AIR 2021 SUPREME COURT 2720), wherein the Supreme Court set aside the RBI prohibition but stated that the government of India is free to pass legislation to prohibit cryptocurrencies.

FIU-IND has undertaken enforcement action against numerous cryptocurrency platforms for their failure to comply with registration and reporting requirements. For example, Binance was fined INR18,82,00,000 (approximately USD2,170,000), and Bybit was fined INR9,27,00,000 (approximately USD1,070,000), for failure to comply with the Prevention of Money Laundering Act. Both platforms are now FIU-IND-registered.

Income on VDAs has been taxed since 2022 at a rate of 30% (plus 4% cess), with no deductions permitted other than the cost of acquisition. Additionally, tax deducted at source at a rate of 1% is chargeable on crypto transactions.

There are no legal ESG/sustainable finance requirements in India that apply to digital assets.

Data protection laws in India (including the incoming Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 – the “DPDP Act”) do not have specific provisions relating to blockchain-based products and services.

While the DPDP Act is primarily consent-based, personal data that has been made publicly available by the data subject (referred to as a “Data Principal” under the DPDP Act) to whom it relates is exempt from the scope of the DPDP Act. Therefore, personal data made available on a blockchain by the data subject to whom it relates (such as public keys) will not be subject to the DPDP Act.

JSA Advocates & Solicitors

18th Floor, SKAV 909
No 9/1 Residency Road
Richmond Circle
Bengaluru 560025
Karnataka
India

+91 80 4350 3600

pro-team@jsalaw.com www.jsalaw.com
Author Business Card

Law and Practice in India

Authors

Probir Roy Chowdhury
Nikhil George

JSA Advocates & Solicitors is a leading full-service Indian law firm with a substantial national footprint, including key offices in Mumbai, Delhi, Bengaluru, Chennai, Gurugram, Hyderabad and Ahmedabad. JSA has a team of over 600 legal professionals and a dedicated fintech practice within its technology, media and telecommunications (TMT) practice group. JSA regularly advises on the regulatory landscape for virtual digital assets in India, including assisting cryptocurrency exchanges with market entry strategies and counselling blockchain-based businesses on compliance and structuring. JSA’s key clients in the virtual digital assets sector include a large Indian cryptocurrency custodial exchange and financial services platform; a multinational digital media streaming platform with an NFT vertical; a multinational ad-tech, social media and online gaming platform with an NFT vertical; and one of the world’s largest technology conglomerates, which offers, amongst other things, cloud-based blockchain and cryptocurrency services.