Reclassifying air purifiers as medical devices would be counter-productive, Centre tells Delhi HC

The Centre on Friday opposed a public interest litigation (PIL) at the Delhi High Court seeking directions to classify air purifiers as “medical devices” and reduce their GST rates, noting that such a move would be counter-productive, as it would subject the air purifiers to additional regulatory compliance.

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

“The reliefs (sought in the petition) 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 affidavit read.

“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 petition is not aimed at addressing any genuine public interest concern, but is a colourable and motivated exercise of the public interest jurisdiction,” it added.

The affidavit was filed in response to the PIL seeking directions to the Centre to classify air purifiers as “medical devices” and bring them in the GST’s 5% slab from 18%.

The petition said air purifiers cannot be treated as “luxury items” in view of the “extreme emergency crisis” caused by 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 masses in view of the 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, however, 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”.