DGGI Proposal Seeks Website Identification in Payment Records to Trace Illegal Online Gaming Transactions in India
India’s DGGI proposes adding directing website and linked bank account details to payment records to trace illegal gaming funds after identifying INR 700 billion in transactions. The move supports the 2025 ban on online money games, effective May 2026, with no skill-chance distinction. Responsibility for data collection and verification methods remain undefined.
SCCG Take — Enforcement gains a clearer transaction trail, yet undefined obligations risk delaying compliance for banks and gateways. Regulators must resolve responsibility before rollout to avoid uneven application.
India is examining whether payment records should contain more information about the websites behind transactions linked to illegal online gaming and betting. The proposal comes from the Directorate General of GST Intelligence, which wants investigators to more easily connect websites with merchants and financial accounts.
Under the suggested changes, payment records would identify the website that sent or directed a user to make a transaction. Authorities also want disclosure of every bank account associated with a website’s goods and services tax registration. These recommendations emerged after a 14-month investigation identified INR 700 billion ($7.4 billion) in transactions associated with illegal online gaming and betting networks during one financial year. That amount covers transactions found during the probe but does not represent confirmed operator earnings, tax evasion or government revenue losses.
Proxy Merchants Complicate the Transaction Trail
Banks and payment gateways currently record information about the merchant receiving a transaction. Illegal betting websites can direct users to proxy merchant businesses, making the relationship between the website and the payment recipient more difficult to establish. Adding the originating website to the payment record could provide investigators with another data point when following funds.
The DGGI has yet to define who would be responsible for creating and keeping these records. Gaming platforms could have a role, while responsibilities could also fall to payment gateways, aggregators or banks. Verification presents another unresolved issue. “Authorities have yet to determine which entities would collect and maintain the additional information.” Any final framework would need a method for confirming that the website recorded is actually the one that initiated the transaction. The requirements could also create additional due-diligence responsibilities for payment providers and banks.
Payment Proposal Follows Wider Online Gaming Restrictions
The discussion is taking place after the Promotion and Regulation of Online Gaming Act, 2025 introduced a prohibition on online money games. It prevents banks and payment systems from processing transactions connected with those games. Supporting rules took effect on May 1, 2026. The framework does not separate online money games according to whether they involve skill or chance.
The legal changes ended an antitrust dispute between WinZO Games and Google. The Competition Commission of India concluded that the new legislation altered the circumstances that led to the case, which originated from a 2022 complaint over Google’s Play Store and advertising policies. Google discontinued its real-money gaming pilot in January 2026. As reported by LCB.org, the DGGI proposals remain under consultation as authorities address responsibility, verification and data access.
Reporting: Casino News Daily
Generated by SCCG’s automated editorial system from published source reporting. SCCG Management holds editorial responsibility.
India's payment tracking proposal sharpens enforcement visibility, but lacks defined obligations—compliance could stall without clear responsibility and verification standards.
We've watched India's regulatory landscape evolve for years, and this DGGI proposal is another enforcement layer on top of the 2025 ban. The INR 700 billion figure shows the scale of transactions flowing through proxies, and this record-keeping shift could finally give authorities the data hooks they need—if someone actually owns the compliance burden.
- DGGI wants directing website and linked bank accounts added to payment records after tracing INR 700B in transactions
- Proxy merchants obscure the website-to-payment link; new rules aim to close that gap for investigators
- Responsibility for data collection and verification remains undefined, risking uneven rollout before May 2026 ban
SCCG angle: SCCG has deep regulatory intelligence and payment ecosystem relationships across Asia-Pacific. When the DGGI framework firms up, we connect operators, payment providers, and compliance advisors who need to adapt fast—whether that's restructuring transaction flows, vetting gateway partners, or understanding liability before the May 2026 deadline.
Gaming, betting and prediction markets — the desk’s read, every weekday.
Subscribe →