What’s actually slowing this PC down?
Pick the symptom - the matching free tool is one click away.
The reported cut of First Games Technology Private Limited’s GST demand to ₹703.66 crore is not confirmed by the latest One 97 Communications filing located for this article. The company’s May 27, 2026 disclosure instead said a show-cause notice proposing ₹5,712 crore, plus applicable interest and penalties, remained pending adjudication. The two figures describe different procedural claims unless an order establishes otherwise.
What is confirmed about the GST notice?
One 97 Communications Limited, Paytm’s parent company, disclosed that its subsidiary First Games Technology Private Limited (FGTPL) received a GST show-cause notice on April 28, 2025. The notice proposed a liability of ₹5,712 crore, plus applicable interest and penalties, for the period January 2018 through March 2023. The company said FGTPL would challenge it. One 97 Communications’ April 28, 2025 exchange disclosure also said the matter would not affect the parent company’s operations or other activities.
As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
In its May 27, 2026 exchange disclosure, One 97 Communications reiterated the ₹5,712 crore proposal and said it was still pending adjudication as of that date. That filing does not report a final liability of ₹703.66 crore or an order reducing the proposed amount.
Was the demand reduced to ₹703.66 crore?
The ₹703.66 crore figure cannot be treated as a verified outcome on the available company disclosures. No matching adjudication or appellate order substantiating that reduction is identified here. It may refer to a later development not reflected in the cited filings, but without the order or a newer issuer disclosure, its amount, date, authority and procedural status are unresolved.
#1 Best Overall
It is important not to equate a show-cause proposal with an amount finally payable. A notice proposes a liability; the adjudicating authority’s order may confirm, alter or drop it. Any later appeal, stay or recovery direction can further affect what is payable and when. The ₹5,712 crore amount is the notice proposal, not a confirmed final demand in the May 2026 filing.
What the May 2026 filing says about the business and financial impact
One 97 Communications said FGTPL’s real-money gaming business had been discontinued effective August 25, 2025, following the Promotion and Regulation of Online Gaming Act, 2025. The company described FGTPL as a joint venture for group consolidation and said the carrying value of its investment was already nil in the consolidated financial statements as of March 31, 2026. It reported no incremental impact on the consolidated financial statements from this matter.
The same filing says the matter relates to FGTPL’s discontinued online real-money gaming business and does not affect One 97 Communications’ operations or other business activities. These are company-reported statements about business and accounting impact; they do not establish the tax authority’s final decision or eliminate the subsidiary’s procedural exposure.
Quick wins for a faster PC:
Repair Windows errors before they cause bigger problemsFix Now →Scan for outdated or missing drivers - takes under a minuteDriver Scan →Clear out junk files and repair common Windows errorsFree Scan →How the Supreme Court ruling fits in
In its May 27, 2026 disclosure, One 97 Communications reported that the Supreme Court had upheld the constitutional validity of the 28% GST levy on online gaming companies. The company also said FGTPL’s notice remained pending adjudication. The ruling is relevant context for the tax dispute, but the filing does not say that the Supreme Court determined FGTPL’s specific assessment or reduced its notice to ₹703.66 crore.
Independent reader supportYour contribution helps us test, update, and keep practical guides available for everyone.What would verify a reduction?
To establish that the amount was cut, a reader needs the underlying order or a newer exchange filing that identifies it. The document should make clear:
- Which authority issued the order and on what date.
- Whether it is an initial adjudication, an appeal, or a tribunal-stage decision.
- The original proposal and the amount confirmed, distinguishing tax principal from interest and penalties.
- The tax periods covered and whether the order applies to the same January 2018–March 2023 period.
- Whether payment, a deposit, a stay or recovery directions are specified.
- What One 97 Communications reports about the effect on its standalone and consolidated accounts.
The GST Appellate Tribunal describes its general role as hearing appeals against orders of appellate or revisional authorities under sections 107 or 108 of the CGST Act and corresponding state GST acts. That jurisdiction information does not show that the tribunal issued an order in FGTPL’s case. GST Appellate Tribunal
Quick Recap
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
Recommended Free Tools
