State Legislatures in Karnataka and Kerala can tax lotteries, including those by the Government, as per Supreme Court ruling.

The Supreme Court held that State Legislatures of Karnataka and Kerala have the legislative competence to impose tax on lotteries, including those organized by the Government of India or other States. The power to tax on "betting and gambling" under Entry 62 of List II encompasses lotteries. The Court upheld the validity of the Karnataka Tax on Lotteries Act, 2004, and the Kerala Tax on Paper Lotteries Act, 2005, affirming that both Acts were within the legislative competence of the respective State Legislatures. The judgments of the High Courts of Karnataka and Kerala, which had ruled otherwise, were set aside.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Legislative Competence of States to Impose Tax on Lotteries.
2. Interpretation of Entries 34 and 62 of List II and Entry 40 of List I.
3. Nature and Scope of Betting and Gambling.
4. Territorial Nexus and Extra-Territorial Operation.
5. Validity of the Karnataka and Kerala State Legislations.

Analysis:

1. Legislative Competence of States to Impose Tax on Lotteries:
The Supreme Court examined whether the State Legislatures of Karnataka and Kerala had the legislative competence to impose tax on lotteries organized by the Government of India or other States. The Court held that the power to tax on "betting and gambling" under Entry 62 of List II includes lotteries, irrespective of the entity conducting them. The Court emphasized that taxation is a distinct matter for legislative competence and cannot be implied under a general legislative entry.

2. Interpretation of Entries 34 and 62 of List II and Entry 40 of List I:
The Court analyzed the scope of "betting and gambling" under Entries 34 and 62 of List II, and "lotteries organized by the Government of India or the Government of a State" under Entry 40 of List I. It concluded that while Entry 40 of List I allows Parliament to regulate lotteries organized by the Government, it does not include the power to tax such lotteries. The power to tax remains with the States under Entry 62 of List II, which covers all activities of betting and gambling, including lotteries.

3. Nature and Scope of Betting and Gambling:
The Court reiterated that lotteries are a species within the genus of "betting and gambling." It referred to previous judgments, including RMD Chamarbaugwala and B.R. Enterprises, to establish that lotteries inherently involve an element of chance and are thus a form of gambling. The Court also noted that the sale of lottery tickets involves a transfer of an actionable claim, not goods.

4. Territorial Nexus and Extra-Territorial Operation:
The Court addressed the issue of territorial nexus, stating that when a State permits the organization and conduct of lotteries within its territory, it establishes a sufficient nexus to impose tax on such activities. The Court rejected the argument that the impugned laws had extra-territorial operation, affirming that the States of Karnataka and Kerala had the competence to tax lotteries conducted within their territories.

5. Validity of the Karnataka and Kerala State Legislations:
The Court upheld the validity of the Karnataka Tax on Lotteries Act, 2004, and the Kerala Tax on Paper Lotteries Act, 2005. It concluded that both Acts were within the legislative competence of the respective State Legislatures under Entry 62 of List II. The Court set aside the judgments of the High Courts of Karnataka and Kerala, which had held that the State Legislatures lacked the power to impose such taxes.

Summary of Conclusions:
1. "Betting and gambling" in Entry 34 of List II is a State subject.
2. Lotteries are a species of gambling and fall within "betting and gambling" in Entry 34 of List II.
3. The expression "betting and gambling" includes all forms of gambling activities.
4. State Legislatures are denuded of their powers under Entry 34 of List II only to the extent of lotteries organized by the Government of India or a State.
5. Entry 62 of List II allows States to tax all activities of "betting and gambling," including lotteries.
6. Entry 40 of List I pertains to regulation, not taxation, of lotteries organized by the Government of India or a State.
7. There is sufficient territorial nexus for States to tax lotteries conducted within their territories.
8. The impugned judgments of the High Courts of Karnataka and Kerala were incorrect in holding that the State Legislatures lacked competence to impose such taxes.

Conclusion:
The appeals filed by the States of Karnataka and Kerala are allowed, and the judgments of the High Courts are set aside. The respective State Legislatures have the legislative competence to impose tax on lotteries conducted by other States within their territories.

---