Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2015 (12) TMI 418

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... garh Administration has not accepted the petitioners' withdrawal of an additional term mentioned in the bid submitted by the petitioners in response to the respondents' tender. The petitioners' bid was accordingly rejected. 2. Respondent No.1 is the Union Territory, Chandigarh. Respondent Nos.2 and 3 are the Executive Engineer and Superintending Engineer of the Electricity Division/Circle of the Union Territory. Respondent No.4 is the Chief Engineer of the Chandigarh Administration. Respondent No.5-M/s Vee Kay Electricals is the party to whom the work has been awarded upon the rejection of the petitioners' bid. 3. Respondent No.2 invited tenders for the work of providing electrification of 2108 flats under the respondents' general housing .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... .... ..... 15. List of Documents to be scanned and uploaded within the period of bid submission. ..... ..... ..... ..... d. Undertaking as per condition No.13 & 16(a). ..... ..... ..... ..... 28. Conditional or Telegraphic tenders/tenderers sent through Fax will not be accepted. ..... ..... ..... ..... 30. The offer must be completed in all respect along with all technical/financial detail as required in tender specification. During comparison of offer, if clarification would be required, the bidder will respond in not more than 4 days of issue of clarification letter failing which the bid of bidder will be evaluated on its own merit. ..... ..... ..... ..... 34. The rates shall be quoted in BOQ inclusive of all ta .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ccepted and the rejection thereof was unwarranted and illegal. 7. The financial bids were opened on 20.07.2015. It was thereafter that the said letter dated 21.07.2015 was written by the official respondents to the petitioners calling upon them to rectify the bid. Clause-13 of the NIT specifically provided that a copy of the undertaking shall be scanned and uploaded to the etender website within the period of the bid submission. Further, Clause-15(d) required the undertaking as per Clause-13 to be scanned and uploaded within the period of bid submission. The undertaking furnished by the petitioners was the one dated 10.07.2015, which we referred to earlier. That undertaking, however, provided that service tax will be charged extra, if appl .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... o the bill of quantities (BOQ) and duly signed digitally. He submitted, therefore, that the rates entered by the petitioners in the BOQ and duly signed digitally could have been considered and the said condition imposed in the undertaking that the service tax would be charged extra, as applicable, could have been ignored. 11. This interpretation of Clause-11 appears attractive at first blush. However, as Mr. Dhiraj Chawla, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent No.5 submitted, the interpretation on behalf of the petitioners is incorrect. What is liable to be ignored is rates and other financial terms "in any other form/letter head if attached incorporated by the vendor." The words "in any other form/letter head" relate to ma .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... does not support the petitioner's case either. Mr. Mansur Ali, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, also relied on Clause-30 of the e-tender notice which reads as under:- "30. The offer must be completed in all respect along with all technical/financial detail as required in tender specification. During comparison of offer, if clarification would be required, the bidder will respond in not more than 4 days of issue of clarification letter failing which the bid of bidder will be evaluated on its own merit." He submitted that Clause-30 contemplates clarifications being sought by the official respondents and being furnished by the bidders. The imposition of the condition contrary to the terms of the tender that the p .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates