Priya Nair appointed new CEO and MD of Hindustan Unilever, to succeed Rohit Jawa

Microsoft's Cindy Rose to succeed Mark Read as WPP CEO

‘Sham’, ‘scam’: Cannes Lions-award winning ads under public scrutiny

30% surge in footfalls, 40% repeat fans, why India's concert economy is exploding

Digital Entertainment Summit 2025: The Highlights

Nobody’s Perfect Retro Porsche Ad

In Conversation With Raja Rajamannar, Mastercard

Shahid Kapoor And Varun Ganjoo Speaks On PokerBaazi's Campaign

In conversation with IHCL’s Puneet Chhatwal & GroupM’s Kate Scott-Dawkins

Why are brands including e-sports in their sports marketing itinerary?

Storyboard18 x The English Nut: How to pronounce these 10 brand names

Experts' Take On Reinvention Of Ad Campaigns Through Technology

Experts Speak On Key Emerging Trends In Cannes Lions Entries

Leaders of the future have to be outstanding human beings: Nestle MD

In conversation with VMLY&R’s Hari Ramanathan

In a major escalation of its crackdown on online betting platforms, the Enforcement Directorate (ED) has issued summons to tech giants Google and Meta, seeking their appearance on July 21. The two companies are being probed for allegedly facilitating the promotion of illegal betting apps, marking a new front in the ongoing investigation into financial crimes tied to digital gambling operations.

According to ED sources, both companies are suspected of providing advertising access and visibility to websites and applications currently under investigation for serious offences, including money laundering and hawala transactions. The probe suggests that by hosting or promoting these platforms, Google and Meta may have played a role—direct or indirect—in amplifying the reach of apps that have operated under the guise of skill-based games.

Tech Giants Face Tough Questions

The ED’s notice to Google and Meta underscores growing regulatory concerns over how global digital platforms handle advertising content, especially from sectors that are banned or highly regulated in India. Investigators are focusing on advertising inventory made available to suspected betting platforms and whether either company made sufficient efforts to comply with Indian laws restricting such promotions.

This development is part of a broader investigation in which multiple influencers, celebrities, and marketing platforms have come under scrutiny for endorsing or distributing promotional content for betting brands. The most prominent among them is Parimatch, an offshore betting company that has aggressively marketed itself in India despite the legal ambiguities around online betting.

<a href="https://www.storyboard18.com/gaming-news/quick-commerce-or-quick-cash-zeptos-promotion-of-illegal-betting-firm-parimatch-61067.htm">Read More: Quick Commerce or Quick cash? Zepto’s promotion of illegal betting firm Parimatch</a>

Earlier this year, Zepto, a quick-commerce startup, was found to be distributing promotional flyers for Parimatch along with grocery orders, essentially delivering gambling ads to households. This move triggered criticism from consumer watchdogs and regulatory authorities for violating advertising norms.

Despite repeated advisories, some companies continue to promote offshore betting platforms in India, risking not only legal consequences but also public backlash, especially as these platforms are often linked to youth-targeted marketing.

Regulatory Clampdown Tightens

The ED's notices come amid heightened regulatory efforts from various arms of the government. The Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, Advertising Standards Council of India (ASCI), and the Central Consumer Protection Authority (CCPA) have issued multiple advisories warning platforms and influencers against promoting gambling services.

Last week, the ED registered a case against 29 individuals, including prominent actors, television hosts, and social media influencers, for allegedly promoting these illegal betting applications. Celebrities like Prakash Raj, Rana Daggubati, and Vijay Deverakonda are among those who have been named in the Enforcement Case Information Report (ECIR), with allegations that they received substantial financial compensation for endorsing these apps.

Among the cases, the Mahadev Betting App stands out as a high-profile financial scandal, with the total scam estimated to exceed Rs 6,000 crore. Several Bollywood celebrities have been questioned in connection with the case, which has also seen allegations of political kickbacks, including ED’s claim that former Chhattisgarh Chief Minister Bhupesh Baghel received over Rs 500 crore from the app's promoters.

In March 2024, the CCPA issued a strict warning under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, reiterating that any form of advertisement or endorsement of betting or gambling is illegal. The Guidelines for Prevention of Misleading Advertisements and Endorsements (2022) further prohibit ads for products or services that are unlawful under existing legislation.

IT and Electronics Minister Ashwini Vaishnaw, addressing the Lok Sabha, confirmed that 1,410 illegal gaming websites have been blocked in 2024 alone. He emphasized that while the Centre is taking proactive measures, state governments also need to formulate and enforce appropriate legislation to tackle the growing menace of online gambling.

Experts cite a growing concern over the socio-economic fallout of unchecked digital gambling. Authorities argue that aggressive advertising—especially on platforms with massive reach like Google and Meta—exposes young users to potentially addictive and financially ruinous services disguised as entertainment.

With the upcoming questioning of Google and Meta, the ED appears poised to test the accountability of tech platforms that serve as conduits for online advertising in India. The outcome could significantly impact how digital ad platforms vet their clients, especially in sectors prone to misuse.

If the ED establishes complicity or negligence, the case could serve as a precedent for tighter regulation of ad-tech operations and may compel platforms to review their ad approval protocols, particularly for markets with sensitive legal frameworks like India.

<a href="https://www.storyboard18.com/gaming-news/tamil-nadu-govt-targets-tnpl-over-surrogate-ads-by-offshore-betting-platforms-rmg-industry-applauds-70281.htm">Read More: Tamil Nadu govt targets TNPL over surrogate ads by offshore betting platforms, RMG industry applauds</a>

<a href="https://www.storyboard18.com/digital/illegal-betting-apps-now-lure-indian-users-with-pornographic-content-37562.htm">Read More: Illegal betting apps now lure Indian users with pornographic content</a>

ED targets digital Ad ecosystem: Google, Meta accused of aiding illegal betting sites

Professional poker player P. Vikram Kumar has approached the Supreme Court challenging the constitutional validity of the Tamil Nadu Online Gaming Authority (Real Money Games) Regulations, 2025. Filed as a Special Leave Petition (Civil) with a prayer for interim relief, Kumar’s plea contests the June 3, 2025 judgment delivered by the Madras High Court which upheld the contentious regulations.

The petitioner, P. Vikram Kumar, a Chennai-based internationally recognized poker player with over 18 years of experience, contended that the regulations framed under the Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Online Gambling and Regulation of Online Games Act, 2022, impose unreasonable and arbitrary restrictions on his rights to livelihood, personal liberty, and digital autonomy. Kumar, who has represented India at the World Series Poker Championship and received multiple accolades, including the ‘Player of the Year 2017’ by the Global Poker Index, derives his primary income from online and offline poker tournaments.

In the petition (a copy of which is with Storyboard18) Kumar submits that the new state regulations directly interfere with his ability to practice and earn a livelihood through online gaming. By enforcing blanket restrictions on online real money games between 12 AM and 5 AM, and mandating Aadhaar-based Know Your Customer (KYC) authentication by private gaming companies, the state has overstepped its constitutional powers.

The petition argues that the Madras High Court erred in dismissing Kumar’s writ petition by wrongly applying the doctrine of res judicata, claiming that the issues raised had already been settled in the All India Gaming Federation v. State of Tamil Nadu case. Kumar asserted that he was not a party to those proceedings, and that the legal questions raised in his case—including the personal impact and broader constitutional implications—had not been adequately addressed in previous judgments.

He argued that the requirement to verify user identity exclusively through Aadhaar for KYC purposes is unconstitutional, as it violates his right to privacy guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution. Moreover, such a requirement being enforced by private entities, and not the government, further compounds the violation of individual rights.

The petition further states that the High Court assumed—without any empirical evidence—that online real money gaming is inherently detrimental to public health. This assumption, according to the petitioner, led to flawed conclusions that undermined the constitutional protections available to individuals under Articles 14 (equality before law), 19 (freedom of speech and profession), and 21 (right to life and liberty).

Kumar’s legal team stressed that the High Court failed to conduct a proportionality analysis—a requirement laid down by the Supreme Court in privacy and free speech jurisprudence—to evaluate whether the restrictions imposed served a compelling state interest and whether they were the least restrictive means to achieve the intended objective.

The petition states, "The Hon’ble High Court has seriously erred in holding that the ‘blank hours’ imposed by the Impugned Regulations is reasonable. The High Court failed to consider that the Constitution guarantees individual freedom and autonomy, including the right to determine when one should sleep, and when one may access and play an online game of skill, within the privacy of one’s own home." 

The petitioner contended that the “blank hours” ban from midnight to 5 AM was irrational and discriminatory. The restriction only applied to online real money games and not to other potentially addictive digital content or platforms, making it a case of unequal treatment without legitimate justification.

Additionally, Kumar submitted that the state’s attempt to regulate online gaming encroaches upon the exclusive legislative domain of the Centre under Entry 31 of List I (Union List) of the Constitution, which deals with “telecommunications and broadcasting, including internet services.” The central government, through the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology, has already notified the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021, and their amendment in April 2023, specifically to regulate online gaming. The petitioner argued that the state’s regulations conflict with these central guidelines and are therefore unconstitutional.

Legal History and Regulatory Background

Tamil Nadu’s attempts to regulate online gaming have had a chequered legal history. In 2021, the Tamil Nadu Gaming and Police Laws (Amendment) Act, which banned online poker and rummy as games of chance, was struck down by the Madras High Court in the Junglee Games case. The Court ruled that these were games of skill and thus protected under the Constitution.

Following that decision, the state enacted the Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Online Gambling and Regulation of Online Games Act, 2022. While this law was partially upheld in the All India Gaming Federation case, the High Court struck down the Schedule that classified poker and rummy as games of chance.

Despite these legal setbacks, on February 12, 2025, the Tamil Nadu Online Gaming Authority notified the “Real Money Games” regulations under Section 5 of the 2022 Act. These included provisions mandating Aadhaar-based verification, cautionary pop-up messages, and the 12 AM to 5 AM ban on gameplay. The new petition argues that the state is essentially attempting to achieve indirectly—through subordinate legislation—what it was prohibited from doing directly by the courts.

Madras High Court Judgment Under Challenge

The June 3, 2025 judgment of the Madras High Court dismissed Kumar’s writ petition along with other related petitions. The Court held that the State had legislative competence to frame such regulations under Entries 6 and 26 of the State List, citing concerns over public health. The judgment asserted that the restrictions were reasonable and in public interest, and that fundamental rights could be curtailed to ensure societal well-being.

However, Kumar’s petition criticizes this reasoning as legally flawed. He pointed out that the Constitution does not grant fundamental rights to “public morality” or “public interest” per se; instead, it allows only specific restrictions under Articles 19(2) to 19(6). The petition argues that invoking Article 21 of the Constitution to justify curtailing rights under Article 19 is unconstitutional unless the criteria for restriction—necessity, reasonableness, and proportionality—are demonstrably met.

The petitioner has urged the Supreme Court to set aside the June 3 judgment of the Madras High Court and declare the Tamil Nadu Online Gaming Authority (Real Money Games) Regulations, 2025, as unconstitutional, void, and ultra vires the parent Act.

<a href="https://www.storyboard18.com/gaming-news/breaking-epwa-challenges-madras-hc-ruling-on-tnoga-regulations-in-sc-74745.htm">Read More: Breaking: EPWA challenges Madras HC ruling on TNOGA regulations in SC</a>

<a href="https://www.storyboard18.com/gaming-news/meity-to-madras-hc-mandatory-aadhaar-authentication-for-rmg-requires-parliamentary-legislation-67323.htm">Read More: MeitY to Madras HC: Mandatory Aadhaar authentication for RMG requires Parliamentary legislation</a>

<a href="https://www.storyboard18.com/gaming-news/exclusive-a-23-games-24x7-junglee-games-take-tamil-nadu-govt-to-court-57569.htm">Read More: EXCLUSIVE: A23, Games 24x7, Junglee Games take Tamil Nadu govt to court</a>

‘My right to play is not up for regulation’ — Poker pro takes Tamil Nadu to SC

In a detailed set of submissions filed before the Supreme Court, Senior Advocate Dr. Abhishek Manu Singhvi, representing Delta Corp Limited and its subsidiaries, submitted a strong constitutional and procedural challenge to the Centre’s retrospective ₹33,500 crore Goods and Services Tax (GST) demand on casino operations.

Division bench of the Supreme Court comprising Justices JB Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan on Thursday reiterated that July 25 will be the final day of hearing after which the judgement will be reserved for pronouncement. 

The demand, stemming from show cause notices issued for the period between July 1, 2017, and March 31, 2022, is based on the contentious valuation of gross bet value (GBV) instead of the globally accepted gross gaming revenue (GGR). The dispute, part of a cluster of transferred petitions raises fundamental questions about legislative competence, the nature of supply in casino gaming, and the interpretation of GST rules under the Constitution.

Casinos Operated Under Valid Licenses

Delta Corp, India’s largest publicly listed casino operator, runs licensed casinos in Goa (onshore and offshore) and Sikkim. These operations are governed by local statutes—the Goa Daman and Diu Public Gambling Act, 1976, and the Sikkim Casinos (Control and Tax) Act, 2002. Over the disputed five-year period, Delta and its subsidiaries paid ₹422 crore in state license fees, ₹262 crore in income tax, and ₹542.59 crore in GST on their gross gaming revenue.

Dr. Singhvi argued that the company is a bona fide taxpayer, and that the staggering retrospective demand—amounting to ₹16,822.97 crore excluding interest and penalties, which push the figure beyond ₹33,500 crore—is not only absurd and confiscatory but also violates constitutional guarantees under Articles 14 and 19(1)(g).

GGR vs GBV: The Heart of the Dispute

The government has invoked Rule 31A of the CGST Rules, arguing that GST should apply to the total bet amount placed by players—termed gross bet value (GBV). In contrast, Delta contends that GST should be levied only on its actual earnings, i.e., the gross gaming revenue (GGR), calculated as the total chips purchased minus the chips returned to players.

Through detailed illustrative examples, Singhvi’s submissions show how taxing GBV leads to a situation where the tax liability can be several times the actual revenue. One scenario revealed that while a casino earned ₹10,000 in GGR, it could be asked to pay ₹61,600 in GST if GBV is used, creating a disproportionate burden.

“The GST calculated on GBV is over 6 times the consideration received by the casino and over 22 times the GST actually payable on GGR,” the submission states, calling the methodology "artificial, arbitrary, confiscatory, and unworkable.”

Legal and Constitutional Arguments

The core legal challenge revolves around the legislative competence to tax gambling activities. Delta asserts that Article 246A does not empower the Centre to legislate on gambling or betting, especially after the deletion of Entry 62 of List II. The Centre can only derive such powers under Entry 97 of List I via new legislation. Additionally, Delta argues there is no “supply” or “transfer of actionable claim” in casino gaming as defined under the CGST Act and related statutes, rendering Rule 31A(3) inapplicable.

Delta further points out that a new rule—Rule 31C—was specifically introduced in October 2023 to address valuation in casinos. The prior application of Rule 31A, which was silent on casinos and focused on race clubs, is therefore ultra vires and invalid for the 2017–22 period.

Financial Impact on the Casino Industry

The financial disclosures made by Delta Corp highlight the staggering mismatch between actual revenues and tax demands. Between 2017 and 2022, Delta Corp Limited’s Goa operations reported a GGR of ₹1,640.40 crore and paid ₹358.39 crore in GST. However, the GST demand raised against it is ₹11,139.61 crore—nearly seven times its GGR—excluding additional interest and penalties, which take the total beyond ₹22,250 crore.

Delta’s Sikkim operations generated a GGR of ₹77.30 crore, on which ₹18.14 crore in GST was paid. Yet, the company now faces a demand of ₹628.20 crore, which may exceed ₹1,250 crore after interest and penalties.

Its subsidiary, Delta Pleasure Cruise Company Private Limited (Goa), posted ₹220.25 crore in GGR and paid ₹53.97 crore in GST. It has now been issued a demand notice of ₹1,765.22 crore, which could balloon to over ₹3,500 crore.

Another subsidiary, Highstreet Cruises and Entertainment Private Limited (Goa), reported a GGR of ₹542.99 crore and paid ₹112.09 crore in GST. However, it is now being asked to pay ₹3,289.94 crore, with the total potentially crossing ₹6,500 crore after penalties.

Combined across all entities, the group had a total GGR of ₹2,480.94 crore, on which it paid ₹542.59 crore in GST. Yet, it now faces a combined GST demand of ₹16,822.97 crore, which with interest and penalty exceeds ₹33,500 crore. This demand is over 13 times the group’s total GGR for the period in question.

Dr. Singhvi’s submissions conclude that the SCNs threaten to destroy the legitimate casino industry, which operates under express government licenses. The retrospective demand, the petition argues, is not only economically ruinous but also legally unsustainable and violative of settled constitutional principles, including certainty in taxation and fair play under Article 14.

In a parallel argument, Senior Advocate Balbir Singh, representing real money gaming operator, urged the court to distinguish between “betting,” “gambling,” and “games of skill.” He argued that online money gaming was treated as an OIDAR service under the IGST Act until 2023 amendments reclassified it as a taxable actionable claim.

Singh claimed that such retrospective demands are “untenable,” particularly for an industry that has been regularly paying taxes under the previously defined regime.

The Supreme Court is set to resume hearing the matter on July 18, 2025, with Dr. Singhvi to continue his submissions.

<a href="https://www.storyboard18.com/gaming-news/breaking-sc-to-seal-fate-of-online-gaming-industry-on-july-25-will-reserve-judgement-74608.htm">Read More: Breaking: SC to seal fate of online gaming industry on July 25, will reserve judgement</a>

<a href="https://www.storyboard18.com/gaming-news/player-transactions-not-operators-tax-burden-gaming-firms-argue-in-supreme-court-74679.htm">Read More: Player transactions not operator’s tax burden, gaming firms argue in Supreme Court</a>

<a href="https://www.storyboard18.com/gaming-news/sc-online-gaming-case-gst-rule-a-constitutional-overreach-colourable-exercise-of-power-65747.htm">Read More: SC online gaming case: GST rule a Constitutional overreach, ‘Colourable exercise of power’</a>

Delta Corp calls ₹33,500 cr retrospective GST demand as ‘confiscatory’ in SC

The Esports Players Welfare Association (EPWA) has approached the Supreme Court to challenge the Madras High Court's decision upholding the Tamil Nadu government’s online real money gaming regulations. The move comes after the High Court, in June, dismissed a series of writ petitions filed by major online gaming companies, effectively validating Tamil Nadu’s stringent stance on online gambling.

The Special Leave Petition by the esports players body was filed on Tuesday evening in the Supreme Court. 

A division bench of Justices S.M. Subramaniam and K. Rajasekar had ruled in favor of the Tamil Nadu government, dismissing petitions by leading gaming firms such as Head Digital Works (operator of A23), Games24x7, and Junglee Games. These companies had contested the Tamil Nadu Online Gaming Authority (Real Money Games) Regulations, 2025, and the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Online Gambling and Regulation of Online Games Act, 2022.

The High Court maintained that the state has the constitutional authority to legislate on matters concerning public health, invoking Entry 6 and Entry 26 of List II (State List) in the Seventh Schedule of the Indian Constitution. According to the bench, this authority extends to regulating online real money games as a measure to protect citizens, particularly youth, from gambling-related harm.

However, EPWA, represented by Senior Advocate Aryama Sundaram, has argued that the Tamil Nadu government has overstepped its jurisdiction. Sundaram maintained that legislative control over online gaming, which is inherently linked to digital communication and technology, falls exclusively under the purview of the central government, as provided by Entry 31 of List I (Union List). This entry grants the Centre legislative power over telecommunications, internet services, and other digital domains.

Sundaram also asserted that the Centre’s legislative authority is not diminished by its current inaction regarding the formation of Self-Regulatory Bodies (SRBs) under the amended Information Technology (IT) Rules. The absence of implementation, he argued, does not negate the Centre's exclusive right to regulate online gaming.

Addressing the broader debate on the classification of games, Sundaram challenged the perception that poker is a game of chance. He pointed to two prior rulings by the Madras High Court which recognized poker as a skill-based game — a key distinction that could exempt it from gambling bans.

Industry stakeholders had raised alarm over the far-reaching consequences. Vikram Lungi, a Professional Poker player and TN Lead, EPWA had said, “This verdict directly impacts our ability to earn and compete. Real money gaming is not just a hobby for us it’s our livelihood. There are thousands of us whose careers depend on fair and open access.”

Lungi had further said, “We hope that there’s no domino effect where other states bring in similar restrictions without understanding the realities of professional gaming. What starts in Tamil Nadu could slowly cut off players across India from opportunities we’ve worked years to build.”

<a href="https://www.storyboard18.com/gaming-news/state-has-no-jurisdiction-epwa-counters-gaming-regulation-in-madras-hc-61727.htm">Read More: 'State Has No Jurisdiction': EPWA counters Gaming Regulation in Madras HC</a>

<a href="https://www.storyboard18.com/gaming-news/madras-hc-upholds-tamil-nadu-online-gaming-law-experts-fear-domino-effect-in-other-states-68563.htm">Read More: Madras HC upholds Tamil Nadu Online Gaming Law, experts fear domino effect in other states</a>

<a href="https://www.storyboard18.com/gaming-news/meity-to-madras-hc-mandatory-aadhaar-authentication-for-rmg-requires-parliamentary-legislation-67323.htm">Read More: MeitY to Madras HC: Mandatory Aadhaar authentication for RMG requires Parliamentary legislation</a>

Breaking: EPWA challenges Madras HC ruling on TNOGA regulations in SC

The online Real Money Gaming companies on Tuesday mounted a strong legal challenge in the Supreme Court against the imposition of 28% Goods and Services Tax (GST) on online money gaming, terming the government’s taxation approach as fundamentally flawed and contrary to the legal framework.

Represented by senior advocate V. Sridharan, the petitioners argued that GST provisions prior to October 2023 were wholly inadequate to impose 28 percent tax on online gaming operators in the manner attempted by the authorities. The government’s reliance on Rule 31A of the GST Rules, introduced in 2018, was challenged on grounds that the rule lacked statutory authority under the Central GST Act.

Rule 31A Under Fire

According to the submissions by V Sridharan, Rule 31A, which prescribed the valuation method for betting and gambling, did not comply with the mandatory two-step process under Section 15(5) of the CGST Act. Specifically, the rule was issued without first notifying actionable claims as taxable supplies, rendering it ineffective and invalid.

Further, the rule was introduced using general rule-making powers (Section 164) instead of the specific provision meant for valuation (Section 15(5)), undermining its legal basis.

Actionable Claims Not Classifiable as Goods Before October 2023

The petition contends that attempts to tax actionable claims like betting and gambling as “goods” by amending the Goods Rate Notification were also flawed. Until October 1, 2023, there was no entry for actionable claims in the Customs Tariff Schedule, making their classification as goods unsustainable under GST.

Sridharan pointed out that gambling and online gaming were consistently treated as “services” under various GST notifications and the Integrated GST Act, and this abrupt reclassification lacked legislative coherence.

Major Legal Overhaul from October 2023

The petition acknowledges that from October 1, 2023, the government made sweeping changes to the GST and Customs frameworks. These included:

Creation of a new tariff heading (CTH 9807) for actionable claims.

Amending the definition of “supplier” to deem gaming platforms as suppliers of actionable claims.

Excluding gaming from the services category.

However, the petition argues that these changes only validate the earlier deficiencies. “Without such machinery in place earlier, any demand under the old regime is legally untenable,” said Sridharan in court.

Platform Fees vs. Prize Pool Contributions

A key plank of the petitioners' argument is the distinction between platform fees — on which GST is already paid — and prize pool contributions made by players, which are held in trust and returned to winners. The petition claims that these deposits do not constitute consideration and thus cannot be taxed under GST.

"In the case of online games, the online games are played between the players with the online gaming operator merely providing platform services. The Operator, as the supplier of platform services, has discharged GST during the relevant period at the specified rate. However, the Operator, does not make any other supplies and only
holds the Prize Pool as a deposit to be settled in favour of the winner, which is decided between the players. Thus, the Operator cannot be made liable for supplies made inter-se between the players." 

The legal team relied on Indian and international jurisprudence, including decisions from the European Court of Justice, to assert that such deposits held for prize distribution are not revenue for the platform and hence cannot attract GST.

Transactions Between Players Not Taxable

The petition further argues that gaming transactions between players on a platform cannot be treated as taxable supplies. Since the platform only facilitates gameplay and does not engage in betting or gaming itself, it cannot be held liable for GST on such inter-player transactions.

The case hinges on the absence of clear taxing provisions and the necessary machinery to enforce tax collection before the October 2023 overhaul. The petition concludes that attempts to retroactively impose GST without statutory backing violate fundamental tax principles and must be struck down as ultra vires.

"It is submitted that in the absence of any chapter in the First Schedule to the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 covering ‘actionable claims’ as goods, the amendment to the Goods Rate Notification (supra) is ineffective and no GST is leviable on actionable claims." 

The Supreme Court has scheduled July 25, 2025, as the date for the final hearing in a case involving show-cause notices issued to several online gaming firms. The case, with an estimated financial impact of ₹2.5 lakh crore, is one of the biggest tax battles in India’s history.

Division bench of the Supreme Court comprising Justices JB Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan on Tuesday were shocked to see the list of petitioners appearing on behalf of casinos, lotteries and real money gaming companies to submit their arguments and remarked, "This is a long list of petitioners, this will be a never ending saga." Upon which Justice Pardiwala directed that the court will hear all petitioners until July 17 and will hear rejoinders by the government from July 18.

Pardiwala said, "We will reserve the judgement on July 25 and it will be the last day of hearing the gaming batch matters."

The matter will be heard again on Wednesday afternoon.

Player transactions not operator’s tax burden, gaming firms argue in Supreme Court

In a high-stakes legal showdown that could redefine India’s online real money gaming landscape, the Supreme Court has scheduled July 25, 2025, as the date for the final hearing in a case involving show-cause notices issued to several online gaming firms. The case, with an estimated financial impact of ₹2.5 lakh crore, is one of the biggest tax battles in India’s history.

Gaming companies are challenging the government’s interpretation of Rule 31A of the CGST Rules, which states that GST at 28% should be levied on the face value of each bet. The industry argues that this rule applies only to gambling and betting, not to games of skill like rummy, poker, or fantasy sports.

The outcome of this case holds enormous implications for the real money gaming (RMG) industry. The controversial 28% GST has already dealt a severe blow to the sector. A ruling in favor of the gaming firms could reinforce the legal distinction between games of skill and gambling, potentially shaping future regulation, boosting investor confidence, and ensuring the long-term growth of the industry.

Division bench of the Supreme Court comprising Justices JB Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan on Tuesday were shocked to see the list of petitioners appearing on behalf of casinos, lotteries and real money gaming companies to submit their arguments and remarked, "This is a long list of petitioners, this will be a never ending saga." Upon which Justice Pardiwala directed that the court will hear all petitioners until July 17 and will hear rejoinders by the government from July 18. 

Pardiwala said, "We will reserve the judgement on July 25 and it will be the last day of hearing the gaming batch matters." 

Before the summer break, Additional Solicitor General (ASG) N. Venkatraman presented what he called the “seven sutras” or principles of gambling. These principles aim to create a clear legal framework around wagering, particularly in the context of real money gaming (RMG), a space that has seen explosive growth but remains mired in regulatory ambiguity.

In a methodical and strongly worded submission, Venkatraman drew upon earlier judicial rulings to stress that the presence of a financial stake—not the nature of the game—is the deciding factor in defining gambling. 

Senior Counsel Harish Salve appearing on behalf of real money gaming companies submitted arguments whether the participation fees in online games—ranging from card games like rummy to fantasy sports—constitute "actionable claims" that can be classified as "goods" under the GST regime, and thus be taxed accordingly.

Salve contended that the current GST notifications and show cause notices (SCNs) fundamentally mischaracterize the nature of online gaming. He argued that online gaming platforms act merely as facilitators, not as suppliers of any transferable rights or claims. “There is no ‘actionable claim’ that arises from participating in a game of skill,” Salve asserted, referencing the 2006 Supreme Court ruling in Sunrise Associates, which defined actionable claims in the context of lotteries.

The legal challenge also points to constitutional concerns. Salve argued that the attempt to tax such games as "betting and gambling" contravenes the constitutional scheme, especially after the 101st Constitutional Amendment, which removed state authority to tax betting and gambling under Entry 62 of the State List.

Salve submitted that "Rule 31A is plainly a colourable exercise of legislative power in that it seeks to alter the nature of the tax to a tax on betting and gambling."

The Supreme Court’s ruling in this case is expected to set a significant precedent in the rapidly growing online gaming sector, which has seen exponential growth in users and revenues. The final decision could reshape how digital entertainment platforms are taxed in India, with billions of rupees at stake.

Breaking: SC to seal fate of online gaming industry on July 25, will reserve judgement

Probo in response to enforcement action by the Directorate of Enforcement (ED) has asserted that it is fully cooperating with authorities while reaffirming its commitment to legal compliance and responsible innovation. 

In an official statement, Probo said, “We remain confident that our commitment to compliance and innovation will help us emerge stronger through this process. We have complete faith in India's robust regulatory framework and its vision for responsible tech innovation.”

The ED conducted search operations at four of the company’s premises in Haryana on July 8 and 9, targeting alleged illegal gambling activity under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), 2002.

Describing itself as “India’s leading information marketplace,” Probo positions its platform as a skill-based opinion-trading product aimed at democratizing access to wealth creation for over 4.2 crore users. The company emphasized that user trust and safety remain paramount and that it follows all applicable laws and regulations.

"Probo is an innovative skill-based platform. It provides India’s leading information marketplace that democratises the trading. With over 4.2 crore users, Probo has ensured better access to wealth creation that traditional financial markets have not been able to provide to the general public," Probo spokesperson stated.

Based on multiple FIRs registered across Haryana and Uttar Pradesh, officials claim that Probo’s app and website functioned more like a gambling platform than a skill-based exchange. The agency also flagged content on the platform related to opinion-based betting on sensitive topics such as election results, along with a lack of safeguards to prevent minors from accessing the service.

Financial scrutiny has also intensified, with the ED reporting that Probo raised Rs 134.84 crore through foreign investments routed via Mauritius and the Cayman Islands. Officials are investigating whether these transactions violate foreign direct investment (FDI) norms and point toward potential round-tripping.

In its enforcement action, the ED seized digital evidence and froze assets worth Rs 284.5 crore, including fixed deposits, shares, and three bank lockers.

Read More: <a href="https://www.storyboard18.com/gaming-news/opinion-trading-under-fire-ed-raids-offices-of-probo-seizes-%e2%82%b9284-5-crore-worth-assets-73677.htm">Opinion trading under fire: ED raids offices of Probo, seizes ₹284.5 crore worth assets</a>

Read More: <a href="https://www.storyboard18.com/brand-makers/probos-%E2%82%B9100-cr-bank-account-remains-frozen-punjab-haryana-hc-seek-states-reply-69196.htm">Probo’s ₹100 Cr bank account remains frozen; Punjab & Haryana HC seek state's reply</a>

We are an innovative skill-based platform: Probo on ED raids

The draft Karnataka Police (Amendment) Bill, 2025 is drawing scrutiny from legal and policy experts who warn that while the proposed legislation takes steps toward regulating online gaming, it also raises complex questions about enforceability, jurisdiction, and national coherence.

Accessed by Storyboard18, the draft Karnataka Police (Amendment) Bill, 2025 likely to be tabled during the monsoon session in Karnataka's Vidhan Soudha proposes a robust enforcement regime aimed at banning online games of chance and regulating skill-based platforms. Among its key provisions, internet service providers (ISPs) will be required to block access to unlicensed betting websites and apps upon directive from a newly established Karnataka Online Gaming and Betting Regulatory Authority. Payment gateways, likewise, must freeze all transactions to and from these platforms.

Legal experts, however, question the practicality and jurisdictional reach of such state-level mandates. Gowree Gokhale, an independent legal advisor, noted, “This law can apply only within the state of Karnataka. I have my doubts as to whether ISPs can block any website at a state level.” She further pointed out challenges with regulating payment gateways: “Unless a payment gateway onboards a merchant, their services can’t be used. The payment processors might still onboard the merchant, with the onus on them to geo-block Karnataka.”

The draft bill also mandates geo-fencing and IP-blocking measures to prevent access to offshore operators, an area where state authority may face technological and legal limits. Another contentious feature is the introduction of a state-level licensing regime for skill-based games, which would require platforms to undergo stringent KYC, enforce age and advertising restrictions, and comply with financial transparency norms.

Deepro Guha, Associate Director at The Quantum Hub, voiced concern over fragmented regulation: , “While there has been a demand from the industry for regulatory clarity for the sector, some provisions of this bill are of concern. For e.g., the provision of setting up a licensing regime for skill based online gaming. Previous endeavours by states to do this, like in the case of Nagaland, haven't been particularly successful. Furthermore, separate licensing regimes in different states, would also lead to fragmentation of regulation and increasing compliance costs for industry.” 

Guha said, “The Karnataka government has been engaging with multiple industry representatives and industry bodies during the drafting of this bill. We will have to wait and see if there would be further consultations before the bill is introduced in the Vidhan Soudha.”

Industry leaders have welcomed the intent behind the bill but called for a unified national framework. Roland Landers, CEO of the All India Gaming Federation, stated, “A clear distinction between games of skill and chance, backed by progressive regulation, is essential to ensure consumer protection and foster responsible growth in the online gaming sector. Karnataka, home to the largest and most vibrant gaming ecosystem in the country, has taken a significant step forward by supporting the industry through a transparent and consultative approach. “ 

Landers said, “While we applaud the state government’s initiative, we also believe that state-level laws alone may not be sufficient to curb the growing menace of offshore gambling platforms, which operate beyond India’s jurisdiction, offer no consumer recourse and are emerging as one of the biggest national security threat.”

Addressing this challenge requires a strong national framework that brings together all relevant stakeholders - to effectively regulate and monitor the ecosystem. Only through such a unified and coordinated approach can we ensure the long-term sustainability and integrity of India’s online gaming industry. Landers added. 

The State Government will also constitute a Karnataka Online Gaming and Betting Regulatory Authority to oversee, regulate, and enforce the provisions. The Authority shall consist of a Chairperson, appointed by the State Government, with an experience in law, public administration, or technology. Three members, including one expert in information technology, one in finance, and one in social welfare, appointed by the State Government.

The Authority will work closely with the Department of Information Technology and the Karnataka Police Cyber Crime Branch to develop and deploy the necessary infrastructure for digital surveillance and enforcement. This includes issuing cease-and-desist orders, conducting searches and seizures of servers and digital records, and imposing civil penalties of up to ₹5 lakh for repeat offenders.

<a href="https://www.storyboard18.com/gaming-news/exclusive-karnatakas-draft-bill-puts-legal-onus-on-isps-and-payment-gateways-73461.htm">Read More: EXCLUSIVE: Karnataka's draft bill puts legal onus on ISPs and payment gateways</a>

<a href="https://www.storyboard18.com/gaming-news/karnataka-to-table-bill-banning-online-gambling-regulating-skill-based-rmg-73292.htm">Read More: Karnataka to table Bill banning online gambling, regulating skill based RMG</a>

<a href="https://www.storyboard18.com/gaming-news/up-to-draft-online-gaming-law-committee-to-engage-industry-stakeholders-70555.htm">Read More: UP to draft online gaming law; committee to engage industry stakeholders</a>

Karnataka’s draft gaming law sparks concerns over licensing, ISP, and payment mandates

The Directorate of Enforcement (ED) has launched a crackdown on alleged illegal gambling operations linked to M/s Probo Media Technologies Pvt. Ltd., conducting extensive search operations on July 8 and 9 at four premises in Gurugram and Jind, Haryana. The action was taken under provisions of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), 2002.

The ED’s investigation targets the company's promoters, Sachin Subhaschandra Gupta and Ashish Garg, and follows multiple FIRs registered in Gurugram, Palwal (Haryana), and Agra (Uttar Pradesh) under various sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023 and the Public Gambling Act, 1867.

According to officials, the company operated an app and website under the brand “Probo,” which presented itself as a skill-based opinion-trading platform. However, ED's probe findings suggest the games operated more as binary betting mechanisms, allowing users to place money on simple “yes or no” outcomes, with success entirely driven by chance.

“The platform lured users with the promise of easy income and misrepresented itself as a legitimate knowledge-based product,” said an ED official. “In reality, it mimicked gambling operations while avoiding necessary due diligence measures such as age verification and proper KYC protocols.”

The agency also flagged concerns over content promoting opinion-based betting on sensitive topics such as election outcomes. Alarmingly, the platform reportedly lacked mechanisms to prevent minors from registering.

In a major financial finding, the company is said to have raised ₹134.84 crore through issuance of preference shares to foreign entities based in Mauritius and the Cayman Islands, raising red flags over suspected round-tripping and FDI compliance.

The ED's search resulted in the seizure of incriminating documents and digital evidence. Assets worth ₹284.5 crore—held in fixed deposits and shares—have been frozen, alongside three bank lockers.

Investigations are ongoing to trace the end-use of funds and determine possible violations under India’s foreign exchange and anti-money laundering laws.

Probo declined to comment on the matter. 

<a href="https://www.storyboard18.com/brand-makers/probos-%E2%82%B9100-cr-bank-account-remains-frozen-punjab-haryana-hc-seek-states-reply-69196.htm">Read More: Probo’s ₹100 Cr bank account remains frozen; Punjab & Haryana HC seek state's reply</a>

<a href="https://www.storyboard18.com/gaming-news/asci-alters-whitepaper-on-opinion-trading-removes-probo-sportsbaazi-and-tradex-references-70978.htm">Read More: ASCI alters whitepaper on Opinion Trading; removes Probo, SportsBaazi and TradeX references</a>

<a href="https://www.storyboard18.com/gaming-news/sc-refuses-to-de-freeze-100-crore-account-of-opinion-trading-platform-probo-68361.htm">Read More: SC refuses to De-freeze ₹100 Cr account of opinion trading platform Probo</a>

Opinion trading under fire: ED raids offices of Probo, seizes ₹284.5 crore worth assets

On Wednesday, the Maharashtra government has officially acknowledged a disturbing rise in crimes—including suicides and financial fraud—linked to online gambling and gaming addiction. In a response tabled during the monsoon session of the state legislature, Deputy Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis revealed that multiple cases across the state have been traced to the growing influence of gambling apps often promoted by celebrities. He said the state has urged the Centre to enact a dedicated law to regulate online lotteries and gambling platforms.

The question during the monsoon session was raised by members Chitra Wagh, Prasad Lad, Pravin Darekar and advocate Niranjan Davkhare to Devendra Fadnavis, Chief Minister and Home Minister of Maharashtra. 

A 16-year-old boy from Wakad, Pimpri-Chinchwad (District Pune) tragically died by suicide in April 2025 after becoming addicted to online gambling. The boy jumped from the 14th floor of the residential building where he lived. The incident has been confirmed by Deputy Chief Minister and Home Minister Devendra Fadnavis, who stated that a case was registered at Ravet Police Station under Pimpri-Chinchwad Police Commissionerate as Crime No. 32/2024 under Section 194 of the IPC.

Fadnavis acknowledged the role of social media and celebrity promotions in driving gambling among the youth. “Yes, it is true that excessive use of social media and widespread promotion of gambling apps by celebrities are luring the youth, leading to addiction, financial ruin, and even suicides,” Fadnavis stated.

Fadnavis also shared data showing the gravity of the situation:

In 2021, a suicide due to online gaming was reported in Nashik Rural.

In 2023, a case was reported in Gondia.

In 2024, Pimpri-Chinchwad saw one such suicide.

In 2025, Dharashiv district reported two murders and one suicide related to online gaming.

In addition, financial fraud cases linked to online gaming have been registered in Navi Mumbai and Nashik Rural, with a total of 12 cases between 2022 and 2025.

To tackle this, the Maharashtra Cyber Department is actively running awareness campaigns. “Public awareness efforts are being carried out through social media and organized cyber awareness programs,” Fadnavis said. “Between 2017 and 2019, a total of 3,253 police officers and personnel were trained in modern cyber investigation techniques.”

He admitted that the state lacks specific legislation to regulate online gaming. “Currently, there is no specific law in place to regulate online gaming. However, to bring it under control, the Central Government has issued the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021, published in the Gazette on April 6, 2023.”

The Maharashtra government has formally requested the Centre to enact legislation for the regulation of online gambling and gaming platforms.

From 2023 to 2025, Maharashtra recorded 97 cases of illegal online betting across multiple districts, with Mumbai City alone accounting for 38 cases. Other districts like Chandrapur, Yavatmal, and Nagpur Rural also reported high numbers.

A total of 97 betting and gambling cases have been filed across various districts of Maharashtra. Mumbai City reported the highest number with 38 cases. Chandrapur and Nagpur Rural each recorded 11 cases, while Yavatmal followed with 9. Thane City and Palghar each saw 5 cases, and both Pimpri-Chinchwad and Wardha reported 4 cases each. Mira-Bhayander reported 3 cases. Amravati City had 2 cases. The districts of Akola, Nanded Rural, Navi Mumbai, Dharashiv, and Solapur Rural each reported one case.

<a href="https://www.storyboard18.com/gaming-news/maharashtra-reports-97-gambling-cases-asks-centre-for-regulatory-framework-73481.htm">Read More: Maharashtra reports 97 gambling cases, asks Centre for regulatory framework</a>

<a href="https://www.storyboard18.com/gaming-news/maharashtra-joins-regulatory-wave-eyes-licensing-system-for-online-gaming-62061.htm">Read More: Maharashtra joins regulatory wave, eyes licensing system for online gaming</a>

<a href="https://www.storyboard18.com/gaming-news/exclusive-karnatakas-draft-bill-puts-legal-onus-on-isps-and-payment-gateways-73461.htm">Read More: EXCLUSIVE: Karnataka's draft bill puts legal onus on ISPs and payment gateways</a>

GAMBLING