Lok Seva Kendra RFP Dispute: GST Registration Threshold Challenge Allows Conditional Proposal Submission Despite Turnover Limitations

HC examined a dispute over GST registration requirement in a Lok Seva Kendra RFP. Despite petitioner's low turnover falling below mandatory registration threshold, court issued notice to respondents. As an interim measure, HC allowed petitioner to submit proposal, with future proceedings contingent on final petition outcome, while directing compliance with applicable regulations.

---

---

Issues involved:
The issues involved in the judgment are the compulsory registration of GST in a Request for Proposal (RFP) for establishing Lok Seva Kendra at Kanadia and the petitioner's eligibility based on their firm's turnover u/s 22 of the GST Act, 2017.

Compulsory GST registration in RFP:
The petitioner challenged the condition in the RFP requiring GST registration, claiming that it was not initially compulsory but later made so through a corrigendum. The petitioner argued that the corrigendum should have been issued before the publication of the RFP. The petitioner's counsel contended that their firm's turnover is below Rs. 20 Lacs, and therefore, registration u/s 22 of the GST Act is not mandatory unless the turnover exceeds this threshold.

Eligibility based on turnover u/s 22 of GST Act, 2017:
The petitioner's counsel highlighted that as per section 22 of the GST Act, every supplier is required to register when their aggregate turnover surpasses Rs. 20 Lacs. Since the petitioner's firm turnover is below this limit, the counsel argued that the compulsory registration condition in the RFP does not apply to them. The counsel emphasized that the last date for form submission was approaching, and the petitioner should be allowed to participate based on their current turnover status.

Court's Decision:
After hearing arguments from both parties, the court issued notice to the respondents regarding the issue of compulsory GST registration in the RFP. As an interim measure, the petitioner was permitted to submit a proposal in response to the RFP dated 30.5.2023. The court specified that further proceedings related to the RFP would be subject to the final outcome of the petition. Additionally, the court directed the petitioner to comply with the relevant rules during the process.

---