Leading with purpose creates wins for consumers, community and country: Hina Nagarajan of Diageo India

'Largest employer in the world is inefficiency': CRED's Kunal Shah at Storyboard18 Global Pioneers Summit

Unheard tales of Maggi’s redemption: How poetry and nostalgia revived an iconic brand

Content creator Raj Shamani’s journey: Prioritizing substance over virality

MIB’s Ashwini Vaishnaw at Storyboard18 DNPA Conclave: Govt working for fair compensation for media houses

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

On Tuesday, former Solicitor General of India and senior advocate Harish Salve presented arguments on behalf of the E-Gaming Federation (EGF), challenging the applicability of Goods and Services Tax (GST) to online gaming platforms. The matter will be heard on May 14 as Salve continues with his submissions. 

Appearing before a division bench of the Supreme Court comprising Justices JB Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan, Salve 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.

<a href="https://www.storyboard18.com/gaming-news/sc-to-hear-%E2%82%B92-5-lakh-crore-online-gaming-tax-case-on-may-5-61796.htm">Read More: SC to hear ₹2.5 lakh crore online gaming tax case on May 5</a>

The petition also challenges the blanket application of Rule 31A of the CGST Rules, which mandates that the value of a bet in gambling or betting scenarios be considered 100% of the face value. Under the current interpretation, GST is being levied not just on the platform’s service fee but on the entire pool of money contributed by players—resulting in a tax burden that vastly exceeds the operators' actual earnings.

According to the breakdown provided in court, operators typically retain only 10% of the entry fee as a platform fee, which already includes an 18% GST component. However, the Department's interpretation demands GST at 28% on the entire entry fee, raising the tax liability to more than double the platform's gross earnings.

The petitioners emphasized that in fantasy sports and other skill-based games, the operators do not own or control the prize pool. Instead, players contribute to and compete for the pool, while operators merely earn a pre-defined fee for providing the platform. Additionally, the operators neither participate in the games nor receive a share of the winnings.

The submissions highlighted that players' deposits are maintained in escrow accounts, and winnings are credited directly to individual players’ wallets—emphasizing the separation between the operator's revenues and the game pool.

Salve said, "The essential feature of these games is that a Player who participates in the game plays against other Players, and the Operators only provide and handle the platform but do not participate in the games."

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."

<a href="https://www.storyboard18.com/gaming-news/breaking-wagering-on-game-of-skill-amounts-to-gambling-and-betting-govt-of-india-tells-sc-64545.htm">Read More: Wagering on game of skill amounts to gambling and betting: Govt of India tells SC</a>

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.

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.

<a href="https://www.storyboard18.com/gaming-news/breaking-supreme-court-hears-centres-seven-sutras-on-gambling-in-online-games-64712.htm">Read More: Supreme Court hears Centre’s ‘Seven Sutras’ on gambling in online games</a>

<a href="https://www.storyboard18.com/brand-makers/scintilla-of-skill-argument-returns-as-gaming-companies-challenge-govts-stance-in-sc-64900.htm">Read More: ‘Scintilla of Skill’ argument returns as gaming companies challenge govt's stance in SC</a>



SC online gaming case: GST rule a Constitutional overreach, ‘Colourable exercise of power’

The Ministry of Information and Broadcasting is planning to open its first regional Indian Institute of Creative Technology (IICT) center at Hyderabad. The centre will be located at Hyderabad's IMAGE (Innovation in animation, Multimedia, Gaming, and Entertainment) Tower.

<a href="https://www.storyboard18.com/how-it-works/waves-iict-to-further-strengthen-mumbais-role-as-key-centre-in-global-creative-ecosystem-ashwini-vaishnaw-64003.htm">Read more: WAVES, IICT to further strengthen Mumbai's role as key centre in global creative ecosystem: Ashwini Vaishnaw</a>

<a href="https://www.storyboard18.com/brand-marketing/union-minister-ashwini-vaishnaw-announces-indian-institute-of-creative-technology-for-avgc-xr-sector-64446.htm">Read more: Union Minister Ashwini Vaishnaw announces Indian Institute of Creative Technology for AVGC-XR sector</a>

Modelled after India's top institutes like IITs and IIMs, IICT aims to provide world-class training for creative professionals. The central government has already sanctioned ₹391 crore for the project. As part of the long-term vision for nurturing creative talent, a Memorandum of Understanding was signed between the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting (MIB) and the Maharashtra government. The agreement includes the establishment of the Indian Institute of Creative Technologies (IICT) in Film City, Goregaon. 

Sources said that top officials from MIB and Telangana were present during a recent meeting with the stakeholders. Jayesh Ranjan, who headed the State Information Technology (IT) and Industries department for nearly a decade and is now CEO of Industry & Investment Cell in Telangana Chief Minister’s Office as well as of Speed Proactive Efficient and Effective Delivery (SPEED) initiative was present during the meeting. 

Shaik Khaja Vali, Chief Operating Officer at Telangana VFX, Animation, and Gaming Association (TVAGA) said, "Telangana is already at a forefront in AVGC-XR sector, including the film industry. This proposed IICT regional centre in Hyderabad will be a landmark decision to take Telangana young skill development to the next stage."

He further said, "Through this IICT, it is proposed to have a dedicated R&D lab with mentors from the industry to train new talents and this facility will have cutting edge infrastructure which will have a lot of creative and technical experiments. Also, the incubator program is also part of this proposed IICT centre. We are hoping this IICT regional centre will start by next year, 2026.

Sources also indicate that many government properties have qualified to facilitate this IICT centre, but the actual centre is proposed in IMAGE Tower, which is one of the most anticipated AVGC-XR infrastructure in Hyderabad. "Till the time the IMAGE Tower is ready, government is ready to provide an alternative space within top locations in Hyderabad. 

Union Minister Vaishnaw had earlier announced that a $1 billion fund will be created for the creators' economy. This fund will be dedicated to ensuring that the energetic creators, who are using the latest technologies today, will be able to access capital, hone their skills, upgrade their production levels, and reach the global market.

Additionally, the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting (I&B) and the Maharashtra government have announced plans to develop a massive global creative centre on a 240-acre land parcel in Malad, Mumbai. This ambitious project follows the announcement of the Indian Institute of Creative Technologies (IICT) at Dadasaheb Phalke Film City in Goregaon, aimed at nurturing talent in the burgeoning Animation, Visual Effects, Gaming, Comics, and Extended Reality (AVGC-XR) sectors.

<a href="https://www.storyboard18.com/how-it-works/pm-modi-urges-global-creators-investors-to-make-india-their-content-playground-says-invest-not-just-in-platforms-but-in-people-64000.htm">Read more: It’s the dawn of the Orange Economy: PM Modi at WAVES 2025</a>


EXCLUSIVE: MIB to build first regional IICT centre in Hyderabad’s IMAGE Tower

Leading gaming companies made a case that games of skill, even when played for stakes, should not fall under the legal definition of gambling, in a high-profile hearing before a bench of the Supreme Court. The bench, comprising Justices J.B. Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan, heard arguments that drew upon decades of legal precedent and constitutional interpretation. 

<a href="https://www.storyboard18.com/brand-makers/scintilla-of-skill-argument-returns-as-gaming-companies-challenge-govts-stance-in-sc-64900.htm">Read more: ‘Scintilla of Skill’ argument returns as gaming companies challenge govt's stance in SC</a>

<a href="https://www.storyboard18.com/gaming-news/breaking-supreme-court-hears-centres-seven-sutras-on-gambling-in-online-games-64712.htm">Read more: Breaking: Supreme Court hears Centre’s ‘Seven Sutras’ on gambling in online games</a>

On May 8, appearing on behalf of gaming platform Gameskraft, senior advocates Gopal Sankaranarayanan and Dr. Abhishek Manu Singhvi contended that Indian jurisprudence has consistently upheld a clear distinction between games of skill and gambling. Dr. Singhvi walked the court through a series of landmark rulings, asserting that the presence of stakes does not alter the fundamental nature of a game rooted in skill.

He further noted that references in the Satyanarayana judgment, often cited in gambling-related cases, pertain not to rummy itself but to ancillary activities such as third-party betting. "Chess, rummy, bridge, these are games that the courts have repeatedly acknowledged as skill-based," Dr. Singhvi said.

<a href="https://www.storyboard18.com/gaming-news/breaking-wagering-on-game-of-skill-amounts-to-gambling-and-betting-govt-of-india-tells-sc-64545.htm">Read more: Wagering on game of skill amounts to gambling and betting: Govt of India tells SC</a>

Senior counsel Harish Salve weighed in with a pointed analogy: if placing a bet in a skill-based game qualifies as gambling, then even a friendly round of golf, where the loser buys dinner, would be subject to Goods and Services Tax (GST). Justice Pardiwala responded with a touch of humor, saying the court could swiftly rule that such casual wagers would not fall under GST.

Counsel Dhruv Mehta, representing the All India Gaming Federation (AIGF), also began submissions, highlighting the diversity of online games offered by AIGF’s member companies. Mehta argued that it would be impractical for the court to deliver factual findings on each individual game, suggesting instead that such determinations be left to appropriate adjudicating authorities.

Mehta further explained that gaming firms have been paying GST under Service Accounting Code (SAC) 998439, which explicitly includes internet-based card games. He cited 2023 amendments to GST law that, for the first time, introduced a formal definition for "online money gaming," bringing it within the ambit of “specified actionable claims.”

On May 5, the Supreme Court commenced hearings in this pivotal case that could redefine the legal and economic framework governing a burgeoning online gaming and digital entertainment sectors. Central to the proceedings is a sweeping Rs1.12 lakh crore retrospective tax demand, covering online gaming platforms, fantasy sports companies, casinos, and racecourses, dating back to July 2017.

The bench of Justices Pardiwala and Mahadevan is examining whether games involving real-money stakes, regardless of whether they involve skill, should be classified as gambling under the GST regime.

Proceedings are set to continue on May 9, with further arguments from Mehta and additional counsels.


Gaming GST case: Supreme Court jests as lawyers debate stakes in games of skill

On Wednesday, gaming companies appearing before a division bench of the Supreme Court comprising Justices JB Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan, contested that a game of skill cannot be classified as gambling when stakes are involved pointing out that historical legal interpretation shows that 'even a scintilla of skill' was once enough to avoid gambling classification.

The bench, comprising Justices JB Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan, heard impassioned arguments that drew from decades of legal precedent, constitutional interpretation, and the evolution of gambling laws in India.

Gaming firms, including leading operator Gameskraft, contended that games like rummy fall squarely within the legal definition of “games of skill.” Their lawyers emphasized that historically, even a “scintilla of skill” was sufficient to distinguish a game from gambling in the eyes of the law.

Representing the Union government, Additional Solicitor General N. Venkatraman laid out a nuanced legal framework, citing three categories of case law. He pointed out that when older Gambling Acts included a “carve-out clause” for games of skill, several High Courts upheld the legality of such games even when played for money.

Interestingly, even after some states amended their laws to remove this protective clause, courts have continued to allow wagering on skill games. Venkatraman argued that the phrase “betting and gambling” should be interpreted as “betting on gambling”—that is, betting on games of chance—not on games demonstrably driven by skill.

Senior advocate Dr. Abhishek Manu Singhvi, appearing for Gameskraft, took direct aim at recent efforts to categorize online rummy as gambling. In his argument, Singhvi made a clear distinction between games of chance and games of skill, asserting that the mere presence of stakes does not turn a skill-based game into a gambling activity.

He underscored this position with references to landmark judgments and sections of the GST Act. Singhvi also highlighted the potential financial fallout for gaming companies, pointing to hefty tax demands based on a revised interpretation of online rummy as gambling.

A significant portion of the hearing focused on the operational structure of online gaming platforms. Counsel clarified that these companies act as intermediaries or service providers—not bookmakers or betting operators—thereby reinforcing their legal position under existing laws.

In a noteworthy moment, the government’s own legal team acknowledged in writing that playing a skill-based game for stakes does not alter its fundamental nature. This admission could prove to be a game-changer as the court moves toward a consolidated hearing on gaming-related legal matters.

‘Scintilla of Skill’ argument returns as gaming companies challenge govt's stance in SC

In a case with major implications for India’s rapidly growing online real money gaming industry, the Union government has laid out its firm position on what constitutes gambling—regardless of whether the activity is based on skill or chance. 

Appearing before a division bench of the Supreme Court comprising Justices JB Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan, 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. The seven key principles he laid out are:

1) There is no gambling if no stakes are involved, irrespective of whether the underlying game is a game
Of skill or game of chance.
2) There is gambling, once stakes are involved, irrespective of whether the underlying game is a game
Of skill or game of chance.
3) A game of chance involving even a competition fee is gambling. (RMDC)
4) A game of skill is per se not gambling.
5) A game of skill, when played with stakes, makes it gambling. (RMDC, Satyanarayana and Lakshmanan)
6) A game of skill played with stakes, though gambling, does not re-characterize the underlying game
From game of skill into game of chance.
7) Protection by some of the states on games of skill played with stake from penalty and prosecution Is proof that the same is nothing but gambling. Such an express carve-out exempting and protecting Gambling on games of skill from penal consequences is called for only because it is otherwise “gambling”. Games of skill played with stakes will not seize to be gambling merely because of a Protection given from penal consequences.

In short: when money is on the line, the government believes it’s gambling—skill or not.

To drive the point home, Venkatraman used a sports analogy. He argued that even if a player like Lionel Messi bets on himself to score four goals—or a fan places the same bet—the action is a prediction of an uncertain outcome and cannot be seen as controlled or entirely skill-based. “The dissection of game of chance and skill gets obliterated after one puts a stake on it,” he said.

He also clarified the position on horse racing. While racing is recognized as a game of skill, betting on it becomes gambling when done outside a licensed racecourse.

In a memorable line, Venkatraman added: “A game of dice leads to a game of vice.”

“We have no issue with games of skill,” Venkatraman reiterated, “but when a person wagers on the outcome, even in a game of skill, it amounts to gambling.” He warned that real money gaming platforms may fall foul of multiple state laws, even if the games they host are skill-based.

Venkatraman also argued that RMG platforms go far beyond just providing a venue. “They facilitate the entire flow of money,” he noted, pointing to features like “cash-in” and “cash-out” systems and in-house game rule-setting as proof of deeper involvement than simple software leasing.

The debate also touched on taxation under the Goods and Services Tax (GST) framework. Venkatraman emphasized that there is no distinction between skill and chance when it comes to GST levies.

Smita Singh, a partner at S&A Law Offices, elaborated on the implications. “Actionable claims like lottery, betting, and gambling are generally outside GST’s purview,” she said. “But betting and gambling aren’t clearly defined under GST laws.”

She pointed to a crucial shift in October 2023, when the GST Council decided that horse racing, rummy, and online gaming fall within the list of actionable claims. This has far-reaching consequences, Singh warned. “It changes how online gaming is classified—from services to goods. That’s a stark deviation from GST’s basic classification principles.”

With hearings set to continue until May 9, however the matter is likely to be extended for further dates. The Supreme Court’s verdict could reshape the legal and business landscape for India’s booming online gaming sector. 

Breaking: Supreme Court hears Centre’s ‘Seven Sutras’ on gambling in online games

In a significant development in the ₹2.5 lakh crore Goods and Services Tax (GST) dispute involving India’s online gaming industry, the government argued before the Supreme Court that staking money in games of skill constitutes to gambling and betting. The landmark hearing, which began on May 5, saw the Centre assert that real money gaming (RMG) platforms are not merely technology providers but active enablers of cash-based gaming.

A division bench comprising Justices JB Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan is presiding over the case, with hearings scheduled until May 9. The proceedings are expected to shape the future of India's rapidly growing online gaming sector, which has come under regulatory and tax scrutiny in recent years.

Representing the Union government, Additional Solicitor General (ASG) N. Venkatraman laid out the Centre’s position, stating that platforms offering cash-based games, even those categorized as games of skill, engage in gambling due to the financial stakes involved.

“We have no issue with games of skill,” said Venkatraman during the hearing. “But when a person wagers on the outcome, even in a game of skill, it amounts to gambling.” He also pointed out that real money gaming maybe also stand illegal under various state gaming laws. 

Venkatraman emphasized that RMG platforms do more than just host games—they actively facilitate the flow of money. He pointed to how these platforms provide both "cash-in" and "cash-out" systems and create the rules for the games, demonstrating a deeper involvement than mere software leasing.

To support the government’s argument, Venkatraman cited previous judicial rulings to underline that wagering—defined as placing a financial stake on an uncertain outcome—remains a key characteristic of gambling, regardless of whether the underlying activity is skill-based or chance-driven.

“Even if the outcome depends on skill, the element of uncertainty makes the act of staking money a form of wagering,” he said. He further clarified that paying a fixed fee to enter a tournament may be permissible, but wagering money on an uncertain result crosses into the realm of gambling.

Using fantasy sports as an example, he noted that while users may create teams based on skill, the actual results depend on the performance of real-life players in unpredictable live events such as cricket, football, or kabaddi.

The gaming industry, on the other hand, is contesting the government’s interpretation of Rule 31A of the CGST Rules. The rule mandates a 28% GST on the full face value of each bet, a policy gaming firms argue should apply only to traditional forms of gambling and betting—not to games requiring skill, like rummy, poker, or fantasy sports.

Prominent legal figures including Senior Advocates Harish Salve, Abhishek Manu Singhvi, Mukul Rohatgi, C. Aryama Sundaram, Sajan Poovayya, Vikram Nankani, and Arvind Datar are representing various gaming companies in what is being seen as a defining legal battle.

The outcome of the case could have far-reaching implications. A verdict in favor of the gaming industry would solidify the legal distinction between games of skill and games of chance, potentially influencing future tax regulations, investor confidence, and the overall growth trajectory of India's RMG sector. Conversely, a ruling for the government could validate the imposition of higher taxes and reshape how online gaming is treated under Indian law.

The Supreme Court is expected to conclude arguments by May 9, with a judgment likely to follow in the coming months.

Breaking: Wagering on game of skill amounts to gambling and betting: Govt of India tells SC

A recent report by the Directorate of Enforcement (ED) has revealed alarming details about unauthorized online betting platforms operating in India, which have generated illicit proceeds worth thousands of crores through sophisticated money laundering schemes.

According to the Directorate of Enforcement Annual Report 2024–25, several unregulated platforms, including the widely known Fairplay app, have been involved in illegal activities such as unauthorized live-streaming of sporting events and online casino-style gambling. In one major case, the Fairplay app illegally broadcasted Indian Premier League (IPL) matches to facilitate betting, resulting in significant financial losses for the official broadcaster, Star India.

Another syndicate reportedly used promotional .apk files to distribute gambling apps. These platforms promised high returns to users who registered and deposited money into digital wallets, ultimately amassing over ₹400 crore (approximately $48 million) in illicit gains.

<strong>Unregulated Apps & Websites</strong>

The key findings of Enforcement Directorate on illegal betting and gambling websites includes on details of fraudsters creating and promoting betting apps on social media and messaging platforms such as Telegram and WhatsApp, often disguising them as “online gaming.” These apps operated without licenses and were frequently hosted on overseas servers to evade Indian jurisdiction.

The ED report highlights that many of these platforms used manipulated algorithms. While users might initially win small sums to build confidence, they were later subjected to consistent losses.

The investigations found that users were instructed to deposit funds via UPI and IMPS into bank accounts that were not in the name of any legitimate business. These so-called “mule accounts” were held by individuals or shell entities to anonymously collect funds.

The accounts were often registered as merchants with payment aggregators like RazorPay and PayU. This allowed the collection of large sums in pool accounts, further obscuring the money trail and making it difficult for authorities to trace funds to the primary culprits, the report said. 

Once funds were collected, they were routed through a labyrinth of accounts to avoid detection. The Fairplay case involved hundreds of such mule accounts. Ultimately, large amounts were funnelled into shell companies, including one posing as a pharmaceutical firm in Mumbai.

Union Minister for Electronics and Information Technology, Ashwini Vaishnaw, had informed the Lok Sabha that tackling these issues requires close collaboration between the central and state governments.

During the Question Hour, Vaishnaw had emphasized that the central government takes prompt action whenever violations come to its notice, ensuring all measures align with the Constitutional framework. "In 2022, only 14 betting and gambling platforms were banned and by 2024 the number reached to 1097. We are continuously trying and even we are getting a lot cooperation from the society."

<strong>Siphoning Money Overseas</strong>

The Enforcement Directorate (ED) had earlier claimed that ₹4,500 crore were proceeds of crime of the online gaming and betting application Fairplay that has been alleged to be involved in money laundering.

The ED recently filed its prosecution complaint (chargesheet) in the case against Fairplay, detailing how it allegedly ran a sophisticated network of shell entities, offshore entities, financial intermediaries and complex money-laundering operations.

The ED report notes that criminals transferred money abroad using cryptocurrencies or falsified import-export transactions. These cross-border transfers made the illicit gains even harder to track.

Laundered funds were often reintroduced into the Indian economy under the guise of Foreign Direct Investment (FDI). In the case of OctaFX, funds returned as share capital to Indian startups, giving the appearance of legitimate foreign investment. Criminals also used the funds to purchase real estate, luxury goods, or make investments in businesses under their control.

Based on these revelations, the Directorate of Enforcement has initiated a series of actions to dismantle the networks behind such illegal platforms. The report urges heightened vigilance by users and financial institutions alike and recommends regulatory tightening around payment gateways and digital wallets.

In the Fairplay money laundering case, the ED said ₹111.59 crores have been seized by freezing bank accounts and properties worth ₹232.65 crores have been identified.

A report by Digital India Foundation stated that illegal betting and gambling activities in India have surged dramatically in recent years, with digital platforms accounting for a staggering 1.6 billion visits in just three months across four major sites. 

"India must shift from the current fragmented enforcement strategy to a comprehensive ecosystem-based approach that effectively disrupts the key enablers sustaining illegal betting and gambling operations," the report added.

It further added that the restrictions should include curbing digital media channels that drive user acquisition, tightening financial regulations to block illicit transactions, and enhancing enforcement mechanisms to ensure long-term disruption of these illegal operations. 


Cryptos, shell firms, and fake FDI: ED report exposes India's betting syndicates

A Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed in the Punjab and Haryana High Court has brought the Advertising Standards Council of India (ASCI) and several high-profile celebrities under scrutiny for allegedly promoting illegal online gambling platforms. The PIL will be heard by division bench of Chief Justice Sheel Nagu and Justice Sumeet Goel on April 30.

Advocate Davinder Singh has sought immediate judicial intervention to curb what he describes as the rampant and unchecked promotion of illegal betting apps such as Fairplay, 1xBet, Parimatch, Betway, Stake, Lotus365, and SkyExchange.

The petition (a copy of which is with Storyboard18) states that ASCI, the industry self-regulatory body, is failing to act against misleading advertisements. The petitioner argues that ASCI has not fulfilled its mandate, by allowing celebrity endorsements that glamorize and legitimize these illegal platforms.

The petition states, "ASCI has failed to monitor and take timely action against misleading advertisements promoting gambling in violation of its Code and the Consumer Protection Act".

Citing Sections 21 and 89 of the Act, the PIL demands prosecution and penal action against endorsers, including actors Ranbir Kapoor, Kiara Advani, Esha Gupta, Urvashi Rautela, Jacqueline Fernandez, and singers like Badshah and Karan Aujla. These endorsements, the petition claims, mislead consumers, particularly vulnerable youth, by portraying gambling as safe and rewarding.

“The endorsements create a false legitimacy and have devastating consequences for impressionable audiences,” the petition states. Several tragic incidents have been highlighted in the plea, including student suicides attributed to betting addiction and financial losses incurred on these platforms.

The petitioner has urged the court to direct ASCI to initiate legal proceedings against the celebrity endorsers and to enforce its code of advertising more stringently. The petition also calls on the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) to block access to these websites and coordinate with enforcement agencies to investigate money laundering, data privacy breaches, and the misuse of Aadhaar and mobile data.

Petition states, "Whether the inaction or regulatory failure of the ASCI in monitoring and penalizing such misleading advertisements violates its statutory duty under the consumer Consumer Protection framework and its self-regulatory code?" 

The PIL has named ASCI as a respondent alongside the governments of Punjab, Haryana, and Chandigarh; the Ministry of Electronics and IT; the Enforcement Directorate (ED); and the celebrities in question.

Singh is pushing for the immediate creation of comprehensive regulations to govern advertising and operations of online betting platforms. He further pleads timely enforcement of Section 69A of the Information Technology Act, which allows the government to block public access to illegal online content, and to take decisive action against violators. The petition stresses the public health, economic, and legal risks these platforms pose, and argues for a holistic regulatory framework.

Advocate Davinder Singh, petitioner told Storyboard18, "It is unfortunate that celebrities openly promote betting and gambling platforms without considering its ill effects on the society. ASCI on the other hand is failing drastically to fulfil its duty to report such misleading advertisements." 

Between April and August 2024, ASCI flagged over 700 advertisements from illegal betting and gambling companies and forwarded them to the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting (MIB).

<a href="https://www.storyboard18.com/gaming-news/exclusive-asci-to-report-snoop-dogg-backed-gambling-platform-roobet-to-mib-57751.htm">Read More: ASCI to report Snoop Dogg backed gambling platform ‘Roobet’ to MIB</a>

Concerns over surrogate advertising have also been raised. In a letter to MIB Secretary Sanjay Jaju, stakeholders in the Real Money Gaming (RMG) industry highlighted how offshore betting operators such as Melbet, Dafabet, Vegas11, Fun88, and 1xBet are disguising ads under similar-sounding brands like Melbat, Dafanews, Vegas11 Sports News, Fun88 News, and Batery.AI.

In a separate but related development, another PIL was recently filed in the Supreme Court by evangelist K.A. Paul, citing the damaging influence of online betting apps on the country’s youth. That petition calls for an immediate ban on such apps and seeks legal action against celebrities—including popular cricketers and actors from Bollywood and South India—who promote these platforms and allegedly mislead their fans by encouraging harmful behavior.

In 2023, MIB issued an advisory to state chief secretaries to crack down on outdoor advertising by gambling and betting companies. Apurva Chandra, Secretary of the MIB, reiterated previous advisories that prohibit such promotions in traditional media and pointed out a shift toward outdoor channels—hoardings, posters, banners, and even auto-rickshaw branding—as a new way these companies are promoting their services. The letter urged local authorities to take immediate and appropriate action to curb these outdoor ads.

<a href="https://www.storyboard18.com/how-it-works/asci-finds-healthcare-and-illegal-betting-top-violative-sector-in-fy24-32344.htm">Read More: ASCI finds healthcare and illegal betting top violative sector in FY24</a>

<a href="https://www.storyboard18.com/advertising/asci-signs-mou-with-the-online-gaming-federations-to-protect-consumers-against-offshore-betting-ads-57043.htm">Read More: ASCI signs MoU with the online gaming federations to protect consumers against offshore betting ads</a>

Exclusive: PIL filed against illegal betting platforms; ASCI, celebs face scrutiny

The Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) has issued a public advisory warning investors against engaging with Opinion Trading Platforms. These platforms, according to SEBI, allow users to enter into arrangements where payouts are determined by the outcome of a yes/no proposition—essentially betting on the occurrence or non-occurrence of future events.

SEBI emphasized that such platforms often mimic legitimate investment avenues by using financial market terminology like "profits," "stop loss," and "trading," which may mislead users into believing they are participating in regulated securities markets.

In its official statement, SEBI clarified that these platforms generally do not fall under its regulatory purview as the underlying activity does not involve trading in securities. Consequently, no investor protection mechanisms applicable to securities markets would cover transactions made on these platforms.

The regulator further noted that since these platforms are neither recognized stock exchanges nor registered with SEBI, any trading of securities—if it occurs on these platforms—would be considered illegal. In such cases, both the platforms and their participants may face regulatory action.

SEBI has advised recognized stock exchanges to monitor and take appropriate action against such violations and reiterated that trades executed on unrecognized platforms offer no legal safeguards to investors.

SEBI via its advisory aims to raise public awareness about the risks associated with these platforms and to reinforce SEBI’s role and jurisdiction in maintaining the integrity of India's financial markets.

It should be noted that the Haryana government's Prevention of Public Gambling Bill, 2025, passed during the budget session in the state's Vidhan Sabha, has cast doubts on the operations of opinion trading platforms in India. These platforms are also currently under scrutiny in the Gujarat High Court. Confederation of All India Traders (CAIT) formally urged the Indian government to ban opinion trading apps and websites referring it as 'Digital Satta'.

Previously, the Confederation of All India Traders (CAIT) formally urged the Indian government to ban opinion trading apps and websites. In a letter addressed to Ashwini Vaishnaw, Minister of Electronics and Information Technology, and Piyush Goyal, Minister of Commerce and Industry, CAIT emphasized the serious risks posed by these platforms, describing them as a form of "digital satta" (online gambling).

CAIT also raised grave concerns about the potential impact of these platforms on India's democratic processes. The letter warned that prediction-based opinion trading platforms allow users to bet on election outcomes, thereby posing a threat to electoral democracy. Given the widespread reach of these platforms, CAIT cautioned that they could influence public opinion and undermine the integrity of democratic institutions.

Recently, the New Indian Consumer Initiative (NICI) PEN Media Literacy in its latest workshop has decided to send a joint representation letter to the Ministry of Consumer Affairs, the Ministry of Information & Broadcasting, the Ministry of Finance, SEBI, and ASCI, urging a ban on opinion trading platforms in India.

Storyboard18 had earlier reported about the unchecked rise of opinion trading games on real-money gaming platforms, which has drawn the attention of the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY).

Globally, in countries like the United States, the United Kingdom, and Australia, opinion trading apps and websites are classified as wagering platforms and are regulated. However, India still lacks specific legislation to govern these activities.

Breaking: SEBI flags 'illegal' opinion trading platforms, warns public to stay away

One 97 Communications Limited, the parent company of First Games Technology Private Limited has received a show cause notice (SCN) from the Directorate General of GST Intelligence (DGGI), Delhi Zonal Unit. The notice pertains to an ongoing tax matter in the online gaming industry and proposes a demand of ₹5,712 crore in unpaid Goods and Services Tax (GST), along with applicable interest and penalties.

The notice, received by First Games on April 28, 2025, argues that GST should be levied at 28% on the total entry amount collected by the platform, rather than the 18% paid on platform fees — a stance that has become a contentious issue across the online real money gaming sector. The liability outlined in the notice covers the period from January 2018 to March 2023.

Paytm clarified that this issue is not unique to First Games, noting that the GST department has sent similar notices to several gaming companies in the past. The matter is currently under consideration by the Supreme Court, which has granted interim relief by staying further proceedings.

In response, First Games plans to file a writ petition to challenge the SCN on legal grounds, particularly opposing the retrospective application of a GST amendment effective from October 1, 2023. The petition will also question the interpretation of regulations before this amendment, seeking interim relief consistent with that granted to other companies in the industry.

Paytm has emphasized that the SCN has no operational or financial impact on One 97 Communications Limited itself. As per accounting standards, First Games is treated as a joint venture (JV), and its financials are not consolidated into Paytm’s statements. The company noted that its investment in First Games is already valued at nil as of March 31, 2024, with an exposure limited to ₹225 crore in shareholder loans as of December 31, 2024.

The Supreme Court of India will hear the biggest taxation matter of online gaming industry from May 5-9. 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.

ONLINE GAMING