Tender tax-change clause binds bidder despite GST introduction; contractual obligation could not be avoided or earnest money refunded.

A tender clause requiring the bidder to bear tax liability at the rate in force from time to time meant the quoted price was not frozen to the VAT rate existing when the tender was issued. The later introduction of GST did not release the bidder from the contractual obligation, because the tender terms required the bidder to account for possible tax changes during execution. Express contractual terms governed the parties, and natural justice could not be used to vary those terms. The writ petition therefore failed, and the requested cancellation of tender consequences or refund of earnest money deposit was refused.

---

---

Issues: Whether the petitioner could avoid the tender obligation to execute the work on the basis of the tax position stated in the tender notice, and whether the respondents were bound to release the earnest money deposit or re-notify the tender after the introduction of GST.

Analysis: The tender notice contained a clause making the bidder responsible for payment of sales tax as per the rules in force from time to time and stating that quoted rates would remain unaffected by changes in the rate of tax. On a harmonious reading of that clause with the special conditions, the tax component was not frozen at the VAT rate mentioned when the tender was issued. The later introduction of GST did not entitle the petitioner to avoid the contractual stipulation, since the bidder was required to factor in possible changes in the tax regime. The Court also relied on the principle that express contractual terms govern the parties and that natural justice cannot be imported to vary those terms.

Conclusion: The petitioner was bound by the tender condition covering tax changes and was not entitled to the relief sought. The demand to cancel the tender consequences or refund the earnest money deposit was rejected.

Final Conclusion: The writ petition failed because the tender conditions validly fastened liability for tax variations during execution of the work, and the Court declined to interfere with the respondents' insistence on compliance.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a tender expressly provides that the bidder bears tax liability according to the rate in force from time to time, subsequent statutory tax changes bind the bidder and cannot be used to avoid the contractual obligation.

---