<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>Bid Rejection Upheld: Court Rules Mandatory UDIN Certification Essential for Tender Compliance.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=76063</link>
    <description>Rejection of bid - requirement of uploading annual turnover certificate issued by the Chartered Accountant for the last five financial years bearing UDIN of Institute of Chartered Accountants of India (ICAI) - The Court found that the stipulation for submitting a five-year annual turnover certificate with UDIN by Chartered Accountants was mandatory. The absence of UDIN was grounds for rejection, and this requirement was repeatedly emphasized in the tender documents. - The Court criticized the Technical Evaluation Committee&#039;s reconsideration favoring Respondent No. 5 as unfair, arbitrary, and biased. It noted that the Committee&#039;s reliance on documents not meeting the UDIN requirement was illegal and overlooked the mandatory nature of the tender conditions.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 27 Mar 2024 08:28:38 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 27 Mar 2024 08:28:38 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=748189" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Bid Rejection Upheld: Court Rules Mandatory UDIN Certification Essential for Tender Compliance.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=76063</link>
      <description>Rejection of bid - requirement of uploading annual turnover certificate issued by the Chartered Accountant for the last five financial years bearing UDIN of Institute of Chartered Accountants of India (ICAI) - The Court found that the stipulation for submitting a five-year annual turnover certificate with UDIN by Chartered Accountants was mandatory. The absence of UDIN was grounds for rejection, and this requirement was repeatedly emphasized in the tender documents. - The Court criticized the Technical Evaluation Committee&#039;s reconsideration favoring Respondent No. 5 as unfair, arbitrary, and biased. It noted that the Committee&#039;s reliance on documents not meeting the UDIN requirement was illegal and overlooked the mandatory nature of the tender conditions.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 27 Mar 2024 08:28:38 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=76063</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>