https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=333102 The court did not grant approval for a bid placed by M/s. SGI Commex Limited as the bid amount fell short of the reserve price by 81.8%. Despite the bidder withdrawing the bid due to the expiration of its validity period, respondent no. 3 sought to protect its rights in the auction process by proposing an independent third party for conducting transparent sales. The court granted time for respondent no. 3 to provide details and scheduled further proceedings, emphasizing that the bidder would be responsible for enforcing any rights for the recovery of sums paid, with all parties having the opportunity to defend against such actions. en-us Mon, 26 Sep 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 04 Oct 2016 10:13:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=333102 The court did not grant approval for a bid placed by M/s. SGI Commex Limited as the bid amount fell short of the reserve price by 81.8%. Despite the bidder withdrawing the bid due to the expiration of its validity period, respondent no. 3 sought to protect its rights in the auction process by proposing an independent third party for conducting transparent sales. The court granted time for respondent no. 3 to provide details and scheduled further proceedings, emphasizing that the bidder would be responsible for enforcing any rights for the recovery of sums paid, with all parties having the opportunity to defend against such actions. Case-Laws Service Tax Mon, 26 Sep 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=333102