2021 (4) TMI 76 - HC - GST

Levy of GST - printed books - submission is that while the goods themselves may or may not be taxable, the requirement of the registration is mandatory under the OGST Act - HELD THAT - The bid of the Petitioner was rejected for non-submission of the GST certificate. The other bidder M/s.Padmalaya submitted a valid GST Certificate. However, the bid of M/s.Padmalaya was rejected for nonsubmission of other documents. It is also pointed out that similar tenders incorporating submission of GST registration certificate as a conditions have been issued by the SCB Medical College and Hospital, Cuttack and the Indira Gandhi Institute of Technology, Dhenkanal. There is merit in the contention of Mr. Muduli that the issue of a particular product not being amenable to GST is very different from the requirement of a supplier of goods having to get a valid GST registration. As pointed out, it is quite possible that in future the goods that are presently exempt from GST, may be amenable to it - the Court is not persuaded that any direction should be issued to Opposite Party No.1 to delete the above requirement as one of the essential conditions to be fulfilled by the bidders. Petition dismissed.

Summary

Issues:
Challenge to rejection of bid due to non-fulfillment of GST registration requirement in tender for supply of medical books and journals.

Analysis:
The petitioner filed a petition challenging the rejection of its bid for not fulfilling the requirement of furnishing its GST registration as per the tender conditions. The petitioner argued that the GST registration requirement was non-essential as no GST is payable on printed books under the Orissa Goods and Services Tax Act (OGST Act). However, the respondent contended that under Section 22 of the OGST Act, any supplier making a taxable supply of books or services must be registered, which is mandatory irrespective of whether the goods are taxable or not.

The petitioner's counsel requested the deletion of the GST registration condition, claiming it was not present in previous tenders and that the petitioner was still asked to supply books even after the bid rejection. The court noted that the NIT explicitly mandated the furnishing of GST registration and found it to be an essential condition based on the counter affidavit filed by the respondent. The court highlighted that other bidders had complied with the requirement, emphasizing its importance in ensuring compliance with tax laws.

Regarding the argument that certain products may be exempt from GST currently but could be taxable in the future, the court agreed with the respondent's stance on the necessity of valid GST registration for suppliers. The court, therefore, dismissed the writ petition, upholding the mandatory nature of the GST registration requirement in the tender process. The interim order allowing the tender process to continue without a final decision was vacated, affirming the rejection of the petitioner's bid for non-submission of the GST certificate.