Operators oppose the tax, which could result in a \u20b92.5 lakh crore (\u20ac26.06bn) liability<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
India.- The Supreme Court of India<\/strong> has held further proceedings adressing the question of whether online skill of games should be brought under the Goods and Services (GST) tax<\/strong> framework in India. On Wednesday, May 14<\/strong>, a two-judge bench of justices JB Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan<\/strong> head from the E-Gaming Federation (EGF). represented by former solicitor general Harish Salve<\/strong>. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Operators oppose the tax, which could result in a \u20b92.5 lakh crore <\/strong>(\u20ac26.06bn) liability. They argue that Rule 31A<\/strong> was designed for chance-based gaming like betting, horse racing, and lotteries, not skill-based games.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Salve contended that the GST framework incorrectly categorises skill-based games alongside games of chance. He said: “No one is arguing that games of skill can’t be regulated when there’s money involved,” he stated. “But that’s a far cry from claiming that games of skill suddenly become games of chance just because stakes are introduced.”<\/p>\n\n\n\n Salve argued that entry fees for games like rummy and fantasy sports don’t meet the legal criteria for ‘actionable claims.’ Citing the 2006 Sunrise Associates<\/strong> judgment, he said actionable claims typically involve guaranteed or transferable benefits.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Salve said: “Online platforms are facilitators. They don’t offer any actionable claim. There is no guaranteed win, no transfer of rights \u2014 just competition among players.”<\/p>\n\n\n\n Salve also challenged tax authorities’ application of Rule 31A, which taxes online game entry fees at 28 per cent<\/strong> on the full transaction value. According to the attorney, this approach is flawed, since online casinos retain only 10 per cent<\/strong> of the entry fee, meaning they are being taxed on revenue they don’t actually earn.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Salve said: “Players compete against each other. The platform simply hosts the game. How can that be equated with gambling?”<\/p>\n\n\n\n The court will hear further arguments from both sides before ruling on the case.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Operators oppose the tax, which could result in a \u20b92.5 lakh crore (\u20ac26.06bn) liability<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2395,"featured_media":777026556,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"is_press_release":false,"is_interview":false,"is_opinion":false,"focusai_summary":"The Supreme Court of India is deliberating the application of a 28% Goods and Services Tax (GST) on online skill-based games, a move opposed by operators due to a potential \u20b92.5 lakh crore (\u20ac26.06bn) liability. Operators, represented by the E-Gaming Federation, argue that skill-based games should not be equated with games of chance under Rule 31A, and that taxing the full transaction value is flawed as platforms only retain a fraction of the entry fees. The court will hear further arguments before a ruling.","focusai_entities":"Supreme Court of India, E-Gaming Federation (EGF), Harish Salve, Sunrise Associates","focusai_location":"India","focusai_target_profile":"ceo_executive (1.0), regulator (1.0), compliance_legal (1.0), operator_casino (1.0), affiliate_publisher (0.7), marketing_crm (0.7), investor_analyst (1.0), supplier_vendor (0.7), journalist_researcher (1.0)","focusai_suggestions":[{"label":"Valuation Impact?","query":"What is the projected impact of a Supreme Court ruling upholding the 28% GST on the full transaction value for the valuation and investment outlook of publicly traded iGaming operators in India?"},{"label":"Regulatory Precedent?","query":"How might the Supreme Court's final interpretation of 'skill vs. chance' and 'actionable claims' establish a new regulatory precedent for online gaming classification and future legislative amendments in India?"}],"footnotes":""},"categories":[154,16334],"tags":[29,1897,225],"class_list":["post-777026554","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-legislation-news","category-south-asia-news","tag-casino","tag-igaming","tag-legislation"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/focusgn.com\/asia-pacific\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/777026554","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/focusgn.com\/asia-pacific\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/focusgn.com\/asia-pacific\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/focusgn.com\/asia-pacific\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2395"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/focusgn.com\/asia-pacific\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=777026554"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/focusgn.com\/asia-pacific\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/777026554\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":777026561,"href":"https:\/\/focusgn.com\/asia-pacific\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/777026554\/revisions\/777026561"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/focusgn.com\/asia-pacific\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/777026556"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/focusgn.com\/asia-pacific\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=777026554"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/focusgn.com\/asia-pacific\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=777026554"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/focusgn.com\/asia-pacific\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=777026554"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}