Tender fairness requires clear HSN and GST disclosure when tax forms part of bidder ranking.

Where GST is included in the price used for inter se ranking in a tender, the procuring authority must clarify the applicable HSN classification and GST rate in the bid documents. The court reasoned that the tax component directly affects bidder ranking, so legal certainty and transparency require the authority to state the correct tax basis rather than leave bidders to resolve classification uncertainty themselves. It further held that omission of this clarification can distort competition, undermine equal treatment, and deny a level playing field. The tender conditions must therefore ensure uniform quoting on the same tax basis.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the tendering authority was required to clarify and specify the applicable HSN code and GST rate for the procurement product when GST value was used for ranking bidders; (ii) whether omission to do so denied bidders a level playing field and affected the fairness of the tender process.

Issue (i): Whether the tendering authority was required to clarify and specify the applicable HSN code and GST rate for the procurement product when GST value was used for ranking bidders.

Analysis: The tender process ranked bidders on the total quoted price, which was arrived at by adding GST to the base price. Since the GST component directly affected inter se ranking, the applicable HSN code and corresponding GST rate were integral to the tender evaluation. In a situation of uncertainty regarding the correct tax classification, the authority could not shift the entire burden to bidders and then treat the resulting tax difference as irrelevant to selection. The authority was expected to obtain clarification from the GST authorities and state the applicable HSN code in the tender documents.

Conclusion: The tendering authority was required to clarify and mention the applicable HSN code and GST rate in the tender documents.

Issue (ii): Whether omission to do so denied bidders a level playing field and affected the fairness of the tender process.

Analysis: When tax rates quoted by bidders materially alter the all-inclusive price used for ranking, unequal tax treatment can distort competition and affect the level playing field. Legal certainty in tender conditions is necessary to ensure transparency and non-discriminatory treatment. Since the GST component was used for evaluation, the absence of a clear HSN code and corresponding GST rate could result in unfair advantage to one bidder over another and undermine the fairness of the selection process.

Conclusion: The omission was held to be inconsistent with fairness, transparency, and the level playing field requirement in tendering.

Final Conclusion: The writ petition was disposed of with a direction that, where GST value is part of the price used for inter se ranking, the tendering authority must clarify the correct HSN classification and mention it in the bid documents so that all bidders quote on a uniform basis.

Ratio Decidendi: If GST forms part of the price used to determine bidder ranking, the procuring authority must ensure legal certainty by clarifying the applicable HSN classification and GST rate in the tender itself so as to preserve fairness and a level playing field.

---