Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / TMI Blogs / RSS

2025 (1) TMI 716

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... involved in the aforesaid petitions, hence heard analogously and disposed of by this common order. For the sake of convenience, facts of W.P. No. 30072/2024 are taken. 2. The petitioner has filed this present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the cancellation of tender No. 08/ISCDL/23- 24/Shop No. 5, whereby the allotment of shop has been cancelled by Chief Executive Officer, Indore Smart City Development Limited, Indore. FACTS OF THE CASE ARE AS UNDER:- 3. The respondent No.1 floated a tender for allotment of 11 shops situated at Gopal Mandir Amphitheater Complex, Indore by way of long term lease under the provisions of M.P. Municipal (Achal Sampatti Antaran) Rules, 2016 (hereinafter referred to ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....issued 5. The respondent issued a fresh NIT dated 04.09.2024 for allotment of Shops No. 3, 4, 5 and 6 and the information was sent to the petitioner about the cancellation of earlier tender. Hence the petitioner has filed this present petition inter alia on the ground that fresh NIT has been issued prior to the cancellation of the allotment in his favor. 6. Shri Chetan Jain, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the petitioner never refused to deposit the 25% amount of the premium amount but the demand of 18% GST is unjustified. According to the petitioner, before cancellation of the tender, no proper opportunity of hearing was granted to the petitioner. Since the shops were under construction, therefore, ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....-, 9,15,950/-, and 9,20,815/-, respectively; therefore, they have been given some time to deposit the balance amount, but in the present case, the petitioner has not deposited any amount after the allotment of the shops; thus, they cannot claim parity with other bidders. Heard 9. The NIT was issued by the respondents on 06.06.2023 for allotment of 11 shops, the terms and conditions of the NIT and allotment have been filed by the respondent along with the return. Clause 20.02 specifically mandates that the highest bidder shall deposit 25% of the amount within 21 days from the declaration of the successful bidder, and he is also liable to pay 18% GST on the sanctioned premium amount; therefore, the GST payable on the premium amount was ....