<?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>2025 (3) TMI 365 - ORISSA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=766980</link>
    <description>Bid validity under the tender terms could be extended by the proposer beyond the original 180-day period, so the challenge that the proposal had lapsed failed. Cancellation of the bidder&#039;s GST registration by the competent taxing authority rendered the bidder ineligible where the tender required a valid registration, and the disqualification on that basis was upheld. The writ petition therefore failed on merits and was not entertained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 27 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 05 Jun 2025 10:58:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=804628" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (3) TMI 365 - ORISSA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=766980</link>
      <description>Bid validity under the tender terms could be extended by the proposer beyond the original 180-day period, so the challenge that the proposal had lapsed failed. Cancellation of the bidder&#039;s GST registration by the competent taxing authority rendered the bidder ineligible where the tender required a valid registration, and the disqualification on that basis was upheld. The writ petition therefore failed on merits and was not entertained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 27 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=766980</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>