HomeSupreme CourtSupreme Court Stays Coercive Action In Online Fantasy Gaming Tax Demand Case

Supreme Court Stays Coercive Action In Online Fantasy Gaming Tax Demand Case

Published on

🚀 Stay Connected With JurisHour

WhatsApp X Telegram

The Supreme Court directed that no coercive steps be taken against an online fantasy gaming company facing a substantial tax demand, as it took note of pending proceedings on similar issues and deferred further hearing until a related judgment is delivered.

The interim protection was granted in a writ petition filed by Fanmade11 Fantasy Sports Private Limited, which has challenged the levy and recovery proceedings initiated against it by tax authorities. The company has questioned the legality of the tax demand arising from its online fantasy sports operations.

The matter was heard by a three-judge Bench comprising the Chief Justice of India, Justice Joymalya Bagchi, and Justice Vipul M. Pancholi. During the hearing, the Court was informed that similar issues are already under consideration in a batch of connected matters, including SLP (C) Nos. 19366–19369 of 2023, in which judgment had been reserved on August 12, 2025, by a two-judge Bench.

Taking note of this development, the Court ordered that the present writ petitions be listed after the pronouncement of judgment in the pending special leave petitions.

In the interim, the apex court directed that “no coercive action shall be taken” against the petitioner company. The order effectively restrains the authorities from initiating recovery proceedings, attachment, or other enforcement measures pursuant to the impugned tax demand until further orders.

The company had sought ex-parte ad-interim relief, arguing that immediate enforcement of the tax demand would cause irreparable harm to its operations. While the Court did not enter into the merits of the dispute at this stage, it granted protective relief in view of the broader legal questions awaiting adjudication.

Case Details

Case Title: Fanmade11 Fantasy Sports Private Limited Versus UOI

Case No.: Writ Petition(s)(Civil) No(s).153/2026

Date: 16-02-2026

Counsel For  Petitioner: Lalitendra Gulani, Adv.

Read More: GST Refund Limitation Inapplicable to Double Tax Deposit Made Under Mistake: Orissa HC

Mariya Paliwala
Mariya Paliwalahttps://www.jurishour.in/
Mariya is the Senior Editor at Juris Hour. She has 7+ years of experience on covering tax litigation stories from the Supreme Court, High Courts and various tribunals including CESTAT, ITAT, NCLAT, NCLT, etc. Mariya graduated from MLSU Law College, Udaipur (Raj.) with B.A.LL.B. and also holds an LL.M. She started her career as a freelance tax reporter in the leading online legal news companies.

Latest articles

Maintenance to Qualified Wife Denied: Allahabad High Court [READ ORDER]

The Allahabad High Court has dismissed an appeal filed by a woman seeking maintenance...

Delay Must Be Examined Considering Wrong Service of Order: CESTAT Remands BHEL’s Excise Refund Appeal 

The Principal Bench of the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), New...

Patna High Court Upholds GST Summons in Fake ITC Probe; Dismisses Writ Challenging Multiple Notices, Imposes Rs. 25K Cost

The Patna High Court has dismissed a writ petition filed by a construction company...

Mere Deposit in Electronic Ledger Not GST Payment: Andhra Pradesh HC Quashes Composite Order

The Andhra Pradesh High Court has held that mere deposit of tax in the...

More like this

Maintenance to Qualified Wife Denied: Allahabad High Court [READ ORDER]

The Allahabad High Court has dismissed an appeal filed by a woman seeking maintenance...

Delay Must Be Examined Considering Wrong Service of Order: CESTAT Remands BHEL’s Excise Refund Appeal 

The Principal Bench of the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), New...

Patna High Court Upholds GST Summons in Fake ITC Probe; Dismisses Writ Challenging Multiple Notices, Imposes Rs. 25K Cost

The Patna High Court has dismissed a writ petition filed by a construction company...