The Aurangabad Bench of the Bombay High Court has decided that a GST clearance certificate required for a government tender must be given by the GST Authority itself and not by a private professional like a Chartered Accountant. The Court does not find anything unfair in rejecting a technical bid for not following this required rule.
A group of judges, Justice Vibha Kankanwadi and Justice Hiten S. Venegavkar, turned down a legal request that challenged the District Collector, Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar, for rejecting a technical bid. The contract is for the 2025 Zilla Parishad and Panchayat Samiti elections to rent tents, furniture, and related items, and asks bidders to provide a valid GST clearance certificate up to March 2025.
Read Also: No Hearing, No Valid SCN: Bombay High Court Cancels GST Refund Recovery
On 22 November 2025, the bid of the applicant was rejected as it did not contain an appropriate GST clearance certificate. The applicant instead had uploaded a certificate issued by a Chartered Accountant, which the authorities held did not fulfil the norms of the tender.
Tender does not cite that the certificate should be issued via the GST department and claimed that similar CA-issued certificates were accepted elsewhere, the applicant stated. In a judgment of the Apex court, reliance was placed for claiming against interpretation of tender conditions.
The HC, rejecting such claims, ruled that GST compliance is a statutory need and any clearance certificate should be issued via the competent government authority. The certificate of the CA mentioned that returns were given to him, and does not validate GST payment or official clearance.
The court observed that the applicant had earlier possessed a valid GST clearance certificate issued by the GST officer dated 17 October 2025, but failed to upload it with the tender filed dated 15 October 2025, without any explanation.
The Court ruled that submitting a departmental GST clearance certificate was a crucial and mandatory requirement, not a minor issue that could be fixed later. Therefore, the authorities were justified in rejecting the bid without allowing additional time. The High Court found no illegality or unfairness in this decision and dismissed the writ petition along with the related civil application.
| Case Title | Rajesh Praful Chordiya vs. The State Of Maharashtra And Others |
| Case No. | 901 Writ Petition No.14107 of 2025 |
| For Petitioner | Mr. J.V. Patil, Advocate |
| For Respondent | Mr. S.B. Pulkundwar, AGP |
| Bombay High Court | Read Order |
