New Delhi, Dec 26 (UNI) With the national capital reeling under hazardous air pollution and residents struggling to breathe, the question of making air purifiers more affordable has reached the Delhi High Court.
However, the Centre, in its reply, on Friday firmly maintained that any reduction in Goods and Services Tax (GST) on air purifiers could only be undertaken through the constitutionally prescribed mechanism and not by judicial fiat.
During the hearing on a petition seeking a reduction of GST on air purifiers from 18 per cent to 5 per cent, the Centre raised strong constitutional and procedural objections, describing the plea as misconceived, “loaded,” and beyond the scope of writ jurisdiction.
Appearing for the union government, Additional Solicitor General (ASG) N. Venkatraman submitted that the petition sought sweeping declarations, including directions to treat air purifiers as medical devices and to mandate a specific GST rate, without impleading the Ministry of Health or following the statutory framework governing medical device classification.
The ASG argued that air purifiers were correctly classified under Chapter 84 of the GST tariff, which covers machinery, and not under Chapter 90 relating to medical devices.
Any reclassification or rate change, he said, fell exclusively within the domain of the GST Council, a constitutional body under Article 279A comprising the union and State Finance Ministers.
Cautioning against judicial overreach, the Centre submitted that issuing a mandamus to direct the GST Council to convene or to decide in a particular manner would violate the doctrine of separation of powers under Article 50, which forms part of the Constitution’s basic structure.
The ASG further informed the Court that a Parliamentary Standing Committee had already made recommendations on the issue to the Ministry of Environment and that the matter was currently under institutional consideration, including action-taken reports by the Department of Revenue.
He also pointed out that, under the GST Council’s regulations, voting if required could only take place in physical meetings and not through video conferencing.
The Centre suggested that the petition could either be treated as a representation before the GST Council through its Secretariat or that sufficient time be granted to file a comprehensive counter affidavit addressing the multiple legal and factual issues raised.
Questioning the maintainability of the plea, the ASG submitted that it did not qualify as a genuine public interest litigation and raised concerns regarding the bona fides of seeking judicial directions affecting taxation policy.
Responding to the Centre’s objections, Advocate Kapil Madan, appearing in person, submitted that the petition was not adversarial and merely sought consideration of the issue in view of the public health emergency caused by severe air pollution in the Delhi-NCR region.
He contended that air purifiers were being taxed under an incorrect GST category and relied on existing GST notifications to argue that the issue warranted urgent attention.
After hearing the parties, the Delhi High Court granted ten days to the union of India to file a detailed counter affidavit, with liberty to the petitioner to file a rejoinder thereafter.
The matter is likely to be taken up for further hearing on January 10.
GST relief on air purifiers must follow constitutional route: Centre to Delhi HC
