Opens Pandora's box: Centre opposes GST cut on air purifiers
What's the story
The Centre on Friday opposed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) in the Delhi High Court seeking a reduction in the Goods and Services Tax (GST) on air purifiers amid the rising air pollution in the national capital. Additional Solicitor General N Venkataraman, representing the Union government, said that such exemptions, without following the proper procedure, could open up a Pandora's box. Moreover, the plea sought that air purifiers be classified as "medical devices," which was also rejected by the government.
Motive questioned
ASG questions petitioner's motive
Furthermore, Venkataraman objected to the petitioner not including the Health Ministry as a party in the case. He even questioned the petitioner's motives, saying, "Who he wants to benefit, we don't know. I see a lot of things in this petition is calculated (sic)." The ASG also sought time to file a detailed counter-affidavit, following which the court asked the Centre to file the same within 10 days.
Details
Must follow proper procedure, says Venkataraman
The high court had asked the GST Council to convene an emergency meeting to decide on the petition, according to Bar and Bench. However, Venkataraman argued that there is a standard procedure for implementing GST cuts, and the GST Council, a constitutional body comprising all states, must follow that process. He also stated that air purifiers are not considered medical devices, and such classifications are determined by the Health Ministry, not the GST Council.
HC questions
Court questions GST Council's decision-making process
The Delhi HC bench, comprising Justice Vikas Mahajan and Justice Vinod Kumar, questioned why the GST Council couldn't hold an urgent meeting given Delhi's worsening air pollution. "Why can't it be done? Do whatever you have to do. Right now, an air purifier costs ₹10,000-15,000. Why not bring down the GST to a reasonable level where even a common man can afford an air purifier?" it asked. However, Venkataraman emphasized that a constitutional process is involved in making such decisions.