Institutional incapacity in customs settlement proceedings excludes non-functional quorum periods from statutory disposal timelines, preventing automa...
Interactive touchscreen panels with integrated computing functions fall under automatic data-processing machines rather than display monitors for cust...
Ex parte injunction service requirements were substantially met, while civil recovery and SFIO investigation into provident fund defalcation continued...
Enforcement of resolution-plan directions continues without a Supreme Court stay, preventing suspension of redistribution and escrowed-fund distributi...
Third-party ownership claims over attached property require Special Court adjudication where purchasers lack registered sale deeds and bona fides rema...
Pure-agent reimbursements in clearing and forwarding services are excluded from taxable value when qualifying third-party payments are properly record...
Customs relief for Strait of Hormuz maritime disruptions remains available, with existing conditions continuing unchanged through the extended validit...
The HC dismissed the writ petitions, holding that the petitioner's failure to submit the latest GSTR-3B within the prescribed period constituted a material deviation rendering the bid non-responsive. The Court found no cogent explanation for the delayed filing, concluded the omission substantially affected bid validity and was inconsistent with tender conditions, and declined to exercise judicial review in the absence of demonstrable mala fides or overriding public interest. The technical committee's declaration of non-responsiveness was upheld as neither perverse nor arbitrary, and the petitioners' challenge to the procurement process was rejected for lacking merit.
The HC dismissed the writ petitions, holding that the petitioner's failure to submit the latest GSTR-3B within the prescribed period constituted a material deviation rendering the bid non-responsive. The Court found no cogent explanation for the delayed filing, concluded the omission substantially affected bid validity and was inconsistent with tender conditions, and declined to exercise judicial review in the absence of demonstrable mala fides or overriding public interest. The technical committee's declaration of non-responsiveness was upheld as neither perverse nor arbitrary, and the petitioners' challenge to the procurement process was rejected for lacking merit.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.