TMI Blog2024 (2) TMI 943X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... year exceeds ten lakhs rupees. Section 23 provides the class of persons, who are not liable for registration under the Central GST Act, 2017 - As Assam is a special category State under the Central GST Act, 2017, the petitioner and the respondent No.7 are required to submit valid GST Certificates, as their bid value is above 10 lakh rupees. Whether the respondent No.7 had submitted a valid GST Certificate along with his bid/quotation? - HELD THAT:- The GST Certificate which is a part of the tender documents shows that GST Certificate of the respondent No.7 had been issued on 04.06.2023. The issuance of the GST certificate could not have been done prior to registration. One of the issues that has also cropped up and would have to be decided is, whether a person can have two GST registration numbers. Due to the disputed questions of facts involved in the present case, this Court is of the view that the said issue would have to be decided by the respondents No. 2 and 6. The respondents No. 2 and 6 are directed to make an inquiry into the validity of the GST Certificate submitted by the respondent No.7 along with his tender documents. If it is found upon inquiry that the respon ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... learance Certificate. Mr. Singha has submitted that the respondent BTC authorities have, in the meantime, settled the Simla Market in favour of the respondent no. 7 by an Order of Settlement dated 07.07.2023, for the period from 01.07.2023 to 30.06.2024. It is contended that as the respondent no. 7 had failed to submit a proper GST Clearance Certificate, submission of which was mandatory, the bid of the respondent no. 7 ought to have been declared as a defective one and since the petitioner offered the 2nd highest bid value and his bid was compliant to the conditions of the Tender Notice, the market should be settled with the petitioner. 5. Mr. Choudhury, learned Standing Counsel, Finance and Taxation Department had produced a Communication bearing no. CTS-51/2023[34]/75 dated 26.07.2023 issued by the office of the Commissioner of Taxes, Assam during the pendency of this case. As per the said Communication, the GSTIN: 18AVRPB0604M1ZI in the name of Dishnath Basumatary [the respondent no. 7] was cancelled by the jurisdictional officer on 09.02.2021 w.e.f. 19.02.2021. The Communication has further indicated that the order of such GSTIN cancellation was preceded by a show cause not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uted question of fact, as the tender documents of the respondent No.7 in the official records shows that the GST Certificate of the respondent No.7 was issued on 04.06.2023. The Tender Notice was issued on 24.05.2023 and last date of submission of tenders was 17.06.2023. The market was settled with the respondent No.7 vide Settlement Order dated 07.07.2023. As such, the GST Certificate of the respondent No.7, which is a part of his tender documents, is a valid GST Certificate. Thus, the GST Certificate submitted by the respondent No.7 along with his quotation was valid, in terms of the said document. Accordingly, there can be no infirmity with the decision of the State respondents in settling the market with the respondent No.7, unless the said GST certificate is a fabricated document. 11. There is another aspect of the matter, which has to be considered with regard to whether it was necessary for the respondent No.7 to submit a GST Certificate, inasmuch as, Clause 8(f) of the NIT provides that the GST Certificate has to be submitted, if applicable. 12. Sections 22 and 23 of the Central GST Act, 2017 provides as follows- 22. Persons Liable for Registration (1) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... plying goods or services or both that are not liable to tax or wholly exempt from tax under this Act or under the Integrated Goods and Services Tax Act; (b) an agriculturist, to the extent of supply of produce out of cultivation of land. (2) The Government may, on the recommendations of the Council, by notification, specify the category of persons who may be exempted from obtaining registration under this Act. 13. Section 22 of the Central GST Act, 2017 provides that every supplier shall be registered under this Act in the State or Union territory, other than special category States, from where he makes a taxable supply of goods or services or both, if his aggregate turnover in a financial year exceeds twenty lakhs rupees. Provided that where such person makes taxable supplies of goods or services or both from any of the special category States, he shall be liable to be registered if his aggregate turnover in a financial year exceeds ten lakhs rupees. Section 23 provides the class of persons, who are not liable for registration under the Central GST Act, 2017. 14. As Assam is a special category State under the Central GST Act, 2017, the petitioner and the respo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 17. As stated in the earlier paragraphs, the GST Certificate submitted by the respondent No.7 along with his tender documents, shows that it was a valid GST Certificate and as such, there can be no infirmity with the State respondents accepting the same, while considering the bid of the respondent No.7. The same is however subject to the same not being a fabricated document. The letters of the Commissioner and Assistant Commissioner of Taxes dated 26.07.2023 06.10.2023 respectively, speak of the fact that the GST Certificates of the respondent No.7 had been cancelled in the year 2021 and that it was registered on 04.08.2023. However, the GST Certificate which is a part of the tender documents shows that GST Certificate of the respondent No.7 had been issued on 04.06.2023. The issuance of the GST certificate could not have been done prior to registration. One of the issues that has also cropped up and would have to be decided is, whether a person can have two GST registration numbers. Due to the disputed questions of facts involved in the present case, this Court is of the view that the said issue would have to be decided by the respondents No. 2 and 6. 18. Accordingly, the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
