Overview
- The vacation bench gave the Union government 10 days to file a detailed counter-affidavit and listed the case for hearing on January 9.
- Appearing for the Centre, ASG N. Venkataraman opposed any judicial direction to reduce the rate, warning such a move would open a “Pandora’s box.”
- The government argued device classification lies with the Health Ministry and rate-setting with the GST Council, questioning the PIL’s maintainability and motives.
- The Centre told the court that GST Council decisions require in-person deliberation and voting, ruling out a virtual meeting.
- The bench pressed affordability concerns, noting air purifiers cost roughly ₹10,000–₹60,000, as the government cited ongoing reviews, including a Parliamentary panel’s recommendations.