New Delhi, Jan 9 (PTI) The Centre on Friday contended before the Delhi High Court that the prayer made in a petition to classify air purifiers as "medical devices" reinforces the inference that the plea is not aimed at addressing any genuine public interest concern but is a "colourable" and "motivated" exercise.

The counsel for the central government submitted before a bench of Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia that classifying air purifiers as medical devices would be counter-productive to the purported objective of the PIL, as it would subject air purifiers to additional regulatory compliances and likely affect their supply in a market already facing constraints.

The court noted that certain averments have been made against the petitioner in the Centre’s affidavit and granted him one week's time to file his rejoinder. It listed the matter for further hearing on March 19.

Additional Solicitor General N Venkataraman, representing the Centre and GST Council, made the submissions while opposing a PIL seeking directions to classify air purifiers as "medical devices" and reduce the GST rates on those, saying judicial intervention in matters pertaining to the tax is constitutionally impermissible.

The Centre contended that the petition is a "colourable" and "motivated attempt" to secure regulatory reclassification under the guise of public interest.

"It is submitted that the nature of the prayers and the petitioner's insistence on judicial reclassification as a 'medical device' reinforce the inference that the present petition is not aimed at addressing any genuine public interest concern, but is a colourable and motivated exercise of the public interest jurisdiction," it said in an affidavit filed in response to the petition.

The affidavit said, "The reliefs are crafted to secure regulatory classification of air purifiers as medical devices under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act (DCA) and the Medical Devices Rules (MDR), with the evident effect and possible ulterior objective of restricting market participation and conferring regulatory and commercial advantage upon a select few entities holding the requisite licences, registrations and/or approvals. The petition is therefore liable to be dismissed on this ground alone." The affidavit was filed in response to a PIL matter seeking directions to the Centre to classify air purifiers as "medical devices" and bring them in the GST's 5-per cent slab. Air purifiers are currently taxed at 18 per cent.

The petition filed by advocate Kapil Madan said air purifiers cannot be treated as luxury items in view of the "extreme emergency crisis" caused by severe air pollution in Delhi.

The court had earlier asked the Centre why it cannot reduce the GST rates on air purifiers to make the machines affordable for the common man in view of the worsening air quality in the national capital and nearby areas.

It had also directed the GST Council to meet at the earliest and consider lowering or abolishing the tax on air purifiers.

The Centre, in its affidavit, said, "Any direction by this court to modify GST rates, convene a meeting of the GST Council or compel the GST Council to consider or adopt a particular outcome would amount to the court stepping into the shoes of the GST Council, thereby exercising functions that the Constitution has consciously and exclusively entrusted to the GST Council." It added that such an exercise would violate the doctrine of separation of powers.

In its affidavit, the Centre said if courts were to issue directions on GST rates or compel specific recommendations, the GST Council would be reduced to a mere rubber stamp, contrary to the constitutional scheme.

"In view of the above constitutional architecture, matters pertaining to GST and making recommendations in relation thereto fall squarely within the exclusive domain of the GST Council. Judicial intervention directing or influencing such recommendations would not only be constitutionally impermissible but would also undermine the framework of cooperative federalism embedded in Article 279A," it said.

Earlier, the court had expressed displeasure over authorities doing nothing to remove taxes on air purifiers in this "emergency situation," when the Air Quality Index (AQI) is "very poor." The court had taken note of the petitioner's contention that air purifiers qualify as medical devices in terms of a February 2020 notification issued under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act.

The petitioner had further said a GST rate of 5 per cent is charged on medical devices, whereas for air purifiers, the tax rate is 18 per cent. He had sought a direction to the authorities to consider charging 5 per cent GST on air purifiers as well, considering the ever-worsening air condition in Delhi and nearby areas. PTI SKV SKV AMJ AMJ

Air purifiers: Centre says reclassification as medical devices and judicial tax directions would improperly intrude on GST Council authority. The central government argues the PIL to classify air purifiers as medical devices is a colourable and motivated attempt to obtain regulatory reclassification that would restrict market participation and favour certain entities. It contends judicial directions modifying GST rates or compelling the GST Council to adopt specific outcomes would intrude on the exclusive constitutional domain of the GST Council, violate the doctrine of separation of powers, and undermine cooperative federalism, and therefore opposes the requested reliefs.