The Delhi High Court has expressed strong criticism towards the central government for its decision to withdraw Goods and Services Tax (GST) concessions on car purchases for individuals with disabilities. The court observed that this action could be considered a form of “positive discrimination,” meaning a measure that might seem discriminatory but is intended to correct historical disadvantages or provide necessary support.
A division bench, led by Chief Justice DK Upadhyay and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela, has directed the Centre’s counsel to seek clear instructions and provide a justifiable reason for this decision. This directive came during the hearing of a petition filed by the All India Confederation of the Blind (AICB).
The petition challenges a notification issued by the Union Ministry of Heavy Industry on October 8. This notification uniformly reduced the GST on vehicles from 28% to 18% for all buyers, without making any special provisions for individuals with locomotor disabilities. Previously, people with locomotor disabilities were eligible for a concessional GST rate of 18%, while others paid 28%. The new notification, by lowering the rate for everyone, effectively removed the specific benefit previously available to disabled individuals.
Advocate Rahul Bajaj, representing AICB, argued that this change violates the rights of persons with locomotor disabilities and goes against the principles of the Right of Persons with Disabilities Act (RPwD Act).
The court questioned the government’s rationale, stating, “What have you done? What can be the plausible basis for this? There has to be a rationale for GST. What is this you have done? You have taken away the benefit already given to them. You brought it down from 28 to 18 and now it is 18 for all. Please give rationale, we cannot understand.”
The court further emphasized the government’s responsibility towards vulnerable sections of society, asking, “What have you done for the vulnerable? The choice is that you better do it. It is a kind of positive discrimination. Why could you not reduce the GST for them as well?”
Consequently, the court has ordered the Centre’s counsel to gather specific instructions on why a reduced GST rate cannot be maintained for the differently-abled category. The next hearing in the case has been scheduled for December 17.
In its order, the court stated, “We direct the counsel representing the respondents to seek instruction as to why a corresponding decrease in the rate of GST to be levied from persons who are orthopedically and visually disabled cannot be brought into effect.”