Just a moment...

Top
FeedbackReport
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Feedback/Report an Error
Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:
TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
By Case ID:

When case Id is present, search is done only for this

Sort By: ?
Even if Sort by Date is selected, exact match will be shown on the top.
RelevanceDate
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        Note

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        Supreme Court Overturns High Court Ruling on Tender Process Rejection

        Laxmi Sales Corporation Versus Bolangir Trading Company and Ors.

        Laxmi Sales Corporation Versus Bolangir Trading Company and Ors. - (2005) 3 SCC 157 Issues:
        Appeal arising out of civil Writ Petition, rejection of tender process, validity of Chartered Accountant's certificate, mandatory requirements for tender acceptance, High Court's judgment review, misreading of material on record.

        Detailed Analysis:

        1. Civil Writ Petition and Tender Rejection:
        The appeals arose from a civil Writ Petition challenging the rejection of a tender process for providing pre-paid telephone services in a specific district. The contesting respondent sought to quash the tender process, alleging that their offer was wrongly rejected by the second respondent, leading to the contract being awarded to the appellant. The High Court, upon entertaining the writ petition, found the rejection arbitrary and unfair, cancelling the contract and directing a fresh tender process.

        2. Validity of Chartered Accountant's Certificate:
        The appellant challenged the High Court's decision primarily on the grounds that the Chartered Accountant's certificate submitted by the respondent was not genuine, influencing the original judgment. The appellant withdrew a Special Leave Petition to approach the High Court through a review petition, highlighting the certificate's lack of authenticity. However, the High Court dismissed the review petition, emphasizing the significance of the Chartered Accountant's certificate in the original judgment.

        3. Mandatory Requirements for Tender Acceptance:
        The appellant contended that the respondent's tender was rightfully rejected by the department due to the failure to provide mandatory information as required in the tender form. The department specified essential requirements, including turnover details, work experience, and a certified profit and loss account by a Chartered Accountant. The absence of these documents led to the rejection of the respondent's offer, a decision supported by the department's counter.

        4. High Court's Judgment Review:
        Following unsuccessful attempts to challenge the High Court's decision through a review petition, the appellant appealed to the Supreme Court. The appellant argued that the High Court erred in concluding that certain documents were not mandatory for tender submission, contrary to the specified requirements in the tender form and annexures. The Supreme Court found the High Court's judgment to be based on a misinterpretation of the tender conditions and set aside the orders made by the lower court.

        5. Misreading of Material on Record:
        The Supreme Court determined that the High Court had misread the material on record, leading to factual errors that influenced the judgment in favor of the respondent. Due to this misinterpretation, the Supreme Court allowed the appeals, setting aside the lower court's orders and dismissing the original writ petition. The Court found that the High Court's decision was not justified based on the evidence presented and the requirements outlined in the tender documents.

        6. Final Decision:
        Ultimately, the Supreme Court concluded that the High Court's judgment was flawed, and the relief granted to the respondent was based on incorrect factual assessments. As a result, the Supreme Court set aside the lower court's orders, dismissing the writ petition and upholding the rejection of the tender process. No separate order was deemed necessary for the appeal arising from the review order of the High Court.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found