Aspen Diagnostics Pvt Ltd vs Commissioner, Customs-New Delhi(Icd ... on 19 January, 2026
7. Learned Authorized Representative, in addition to drawing
attention to the specifics in the impugned order and the technical
distinction between 'ventilators' and 'oxygen concentrators', pressed
for drawing upon the press-release issued concurrently with the
relevant notification, along with subsequent notification, unarguably
pointing to 'ventilators' as intended object of exemption, as
contemporaneous record affording interpretation of intent of earlier
notification. Conceding that the decision of the Hon'ble High Court of
Delhi in Gurcharan Singh v. Ministry of Finance (Department of
Revenue) 10 pertained to purportedly discriminatory levy of
'integrated tax' on import of 'oxygen concentrator' by a class of
9
[2019 (28) GSTL 406 (Chhatisgarh)]
10
[2021 (49) GSTL 113 (Del.)]
6
persons, he did submit that the lack of challenge to 'integrated tax'
leviable on 'oxygen concentrator' at the time of import of impugned
goods, just as for the subsequent period it had been before the
Hon'ble High Court, was abundant demonstration of popular
understanding of the restricted scope of exemption in notification of
April 2020. He also relied upon the distinction drawn by the supplier
of the impugned goods in their web-site.