SC stays Delhi HC's quashing of IGST on import of oxygen concentrators for personal use

A bench presided over by Justice D Y Chandrachud, issued notice on a plea by the Centre questioning the validity of the High Court's decision

The Supreme Court on Tuesday stayed the Delhi High Court May 21 order that quashed the Union government's decision to impose 12 per cent Integrated Goods and Service Tax (IGST) on import of oxygen concentrators for personal use as “unconstitutional”.

A bench presided over by Justice D Y Chandrachud, issued notice on a plea by the Union government questioning the validity of the High Court's decision.

Attorney General K K Venugopal contended that the slab was already reduced from 28 to 12 per cent but still the High Court felt that the imposition of IGST violated right to life.

A decision was taken on May 28 at 43rd GST Council meeting to constitute a Council of Ministers so that 19 related items are exempted. He said the High Court entered into an area of policy as the exemption was based on distinct classification.

The bench, also comprising Justice M R Shah, noted that Article 14 (right to equality) of the Constitution carried a reasonable classification.

Read | SC directs states to provide immediate relief to children orphaned due to Covid

The court sought a response from the petitioner before the High Court and put the matter for consideration after four weeks.

The High Court had passed the order on a plea by an 85-year-old Covid-19 patient, whose nephew had sent an oxygen generator as a gift from the United States.

The High Court had said the importers of oxygen concentrators would have to furnish a letter of undertaking to the concerned authority, declaring that the device is for personal use, and not for commercial use.

It was contended before the High Court that the imposition of IGST by the Finance Ministry on devices meant for personal use violated Article 14 and also abridged the right to have oxygen, which was part of the right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution.

The government counsel had argued that imposition of taxes could not be subject to judicial review, and IGST was imposed to maintain parity with a commercial user and to avoid black marketing and profiteering.