Finance Ministry

Inter-Ministerial Committee report on Virtual Currencies and Draft Bill Banning Cryptocurrency

Inter-Ministerial Committee on Virtual Currencies submits its Report along with Draft Bill ‘Banning of Cryptocurrency & Regulation of Official Digital Currency Bill, 2019’
 
The Government had constituted an Inter-Ministerial Committee (IMC) on 2.11.2017 under the Chairmanship of Secy (EA), with Secy (MeiTY), Chairman (SEBI) and Dy. Governor, RBI as Members, to study the issues related to virtual currencies and propose specific action to be taken in this matter. The Group’s report, along with a Draft Bill has been received by the Government. This Report and Draft Bill will now be examined in consultation with all the concerned Departments and Regulatory Authorities, before the Government takes a final decision.
 
In the Report, the Group has highlighted the positive aspect of distributed-ledger technology (DLT) and suggested various applications, especially in financial services, for use of DLT in India. The DLT-based systems can be used by banks and other financial firms for processes such as loan-issuance tracking, collateral management, fraud detection and claims management in insurance, and reconciliation systems in the securities market.
 
As for private cryptocurrencies, given the risks associated with them and volatility in their prices, the Group has recommended banning of the cryptocurrencies in India and imposing fines and penalties for carrying on of any activities connected with cryptocurrencies in India.
 
The Group has also proposed that the Government keeps an open mind on official digital currency.
 
As virtual currencies and its underlying technology are still evolving, the Group has proposed that the Government may establish a Standing Committee to revisit the issues addressed in the Report as and when required.
 
copy of the Report of the Group, along with the Draft Bill ‘Banning of Cryptocurrency & Regulation of Official Digital Currency Bill, 2019’ has been placed on the website of the Department of Economic Affairs today.

addition u/s 68 ca misconduct cash deposit in bank cbdt circular CBDT Instruction cbdt notification cbdt order cbdt press release cgst circular cgst notification cit revision 263 concealment penalty covid-19 custom circular demonetisation due date extension e-way bill faq GST circular GST Council Meeting gst faq gstn advisory gstr-1 GSTR-3B GST rates IBBI ibc icai announcement itat mca circular MCA notification order u/s 119 penalty 271(1)(c) penalty u/s 271(1)(c) Press Release reasons recorded reopening 148 Reopening us 147 Search & Seizure sebi circular sebi regulations transfer and postings unexplained cash credits validity of notice u/s 148 Withdrawal of 2000 500 Bank Notes

----------- Similar Posts: -----------
Share

Recent Posts

  • Income Tax

No statutory requirement of pre-deposit for stay of demand under Income Tax Act – HC

There is no statutory requirement of pre-deposit for stay of demand under Income Tax Act - High Court stayed demand  …

3 hours ago
  • ICSI

Engagement of Company Secretaries as Young Professionals at RoC Mumbai and Pune

Engagement of Company Secretaries (CS) as Young Professionals in the Office of Regional Director (WR), Registrar of Companies, Mumbai and…

6 hours ago
  • Income Tax

Applicability of Section 115BBE rws 69, 69A 69C in a case before Settlement Commission

Applicability of provisions of Section 115BBE  read with Section 69, 69A and 69C in a case arising before Settlement Commission…

7 hours ago
  • Income Tax

Jewellery purportedly received from grandparent under Will added as unexplained credits

Addition u/s 68 for jewellery purportedly received on death of grandparent under Will upheld. In a recent judgment, ITAT upheld…

2 days ago
  • bankruptcy

SC lays down tests to determine if a debt is financial debt or operational under IBC

Supreme Court lays down tests to determine whether a debt is a financial debt or an operational debt under IBC…

2 days ago
  • Income Tax

Commonality of directors of companies does not mean deposits received was bogus

Merely because directors of two companies were common not mean that deposits received was bogus and companies were shell companies…

3 days ago