LexStreak
Read free →
Madras High Court· 07 September 2026

Is the non-submission of an income tax return expressly required by a tender document fatal, where the document was available with the bidder but not uploaded?

N.Nattathy v. Tender Inviting Authority / The Managing Director
WA(MD).952/2026 · 2026:MHC:3632 · W.A.(MD)No.952 of 2026
Coram: Justice C.V.Karthikeyan · Justice R.Sakthivel
🔖 Save this judgment🔔 Follow s.11 Tamil Nadu Transparency in …📬 Get today's judgments
View the original judgment PDFFree to read. To download it — or the LexStreak typeset copy with the headnote and Points of Law — create an account; downloads are part of the Pro plan.
Answer

Yes. When a particular thing has to be done in a particular manner, it has to be done in that particular manner or not at all; if a tender document has to be uploaded in a particular manner, it should be uploaded only in that particular manner and there cannot be any relaxation. It is not only the income tax returns which should have been filed, but also the audited balance sheet and profit and loss account for that financial year, and by non-submission the bid necessarily had to be rejected.

Headnote

Tamil Nadu Transparency in Tenders Act, 1998 — s.11 — Tender — Eligibility criteria — Rejection at the technical stage — Missing documents clause — Judicial review of tenders — Tender — Eligibility criteria — Mandatory, not relaxable — Held: An eligibility criteria prescribed in a tender is mandatory and can never be relaxed, since any relaxation would cause injustice to those who would have participated had they known that the eligibility criteria was flexible in nature. (¶36, 39) Tender document — Uploading in a particular manner — No relaxation — Held further: Where a tender document has to be uploaded in a particular manner, it should be uploaded only in that particular manner or not at all; non-submission of the income tax returns required for the preceding three financial years is fatal. (¶46, 47, 55) Tender — Clause for obtaining missing documents — Scope — Held further: A clause permitting missing documents to be called for applies only where a document mentioned in the list was not uploaded; it places no obligation on the tender inviting authority to advise a participant to upload documents which are mandatory in nature. (¶55) Judicial review of tenders — No equity in commercial matters — Held further: There can be no equity in commercial matters, and it is not for a participant to dictate how the bids are to be evaluated and examined; the rejection at the technical stage cannot be faulted. Writ Appeals dismissed. (¶48, 56, 57)

Headnote

You've used your free headnotes this month

The answer above and the Court's own paragraphs stay free. LexStreak's full headnote on this judgment needs an account — a free one opens it again.

Create my free account
In the Court's own words
Paragraph 41We hold that the appellant can never claim that this short fall of 39 days in experience should be overlooked on the ground that the work was seasonal in nature. The appellant can also never claim that the non- submission of the income tax returns for the financial year 2024-25 was not fatal and should be overlooked by the first respondent. As a matter of fact, it is not only the income tax returns which should have been filed, but also, the audited balance sheet and profit and loss account for the said financial year. We hold that by non-submission of the said income tax returns and the supporting documents, the bid of the appellant necessarily had to be rejected.
Paragraph 46It is to be noted that when a particular thing has to be done in a particular manner, it has to be done in that particular manner or not at all. This proposition had been asserted again and again by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. To illustrate one judgment, we would refer to a judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in 2025 SCC OnLine SC 774 in the case of Shri Khereshwar Mahadev VA Dauji Maharaj Samiti, Aligarh -vs.- State of Uttar Pradesh and others, wherein, the Hon'ble Supreme Court had reiterated the proposition albeit in A different context. The principLE of law has to be applied in all contexts. The Hon'ble Supreme Court held as follows:
Paragraph 47Thus, if a tender document has to be uploaded in a particular manner, it should be uploaded only in that particular manner and there cannot be any relaxation.
Paragraph 55This clause had been misread by the appellant. If, while uploading tender papers, there had been mention about a particular document and the same had not been uploaded, then that document which had been mentioned in the list of documents and not uploaded, alone could be subsequently uploaded by following the procedure under Clause-8. This clause does not give leverage to the first respondent to call upon a participant in the tender to upload the documents which are required to be uploaded. The fact that the document was in the possession of the participant to the tender process would be a fact known only to such participant. There was certainly no obligation placed for the first respondent to go and advise every participant to upload documents which are mandatory in nature. The appellant can never expect a beneficial service from the first respondent. It is the duty of the appellant to upload every document which is required. If they had mentioned a particular document in the list and had not actually uploaded that particular document, then the first respondent could seek clarification and ask the appellant to upload that particular document, but not otherwise. We hold that failure to upload the income tax returns for the financial year 2024-25, and also the audited balance sheet and the profit and loss account is fatal and the tender submitted by the appellant had been correctly rejected.
Acts & Sections
s.11 Tamil Nadu Transparency in Tenders Act, 1998

One judgment a day. That's the whole habit.

Read the full text of N.Nattathy v. Tender Inviting Authority / The Managing Director — and get the Madras High Court's output as a five-minute daily read, with plain-language headnotes and the questions each judgment settles.

Create my free account

Free forever plan · 30 seconds · data stays in India

Open the full judgment →

Also decided in this judgment
Can an eligibility criteria prescribed in a tender be relaxed where the participant falls short of the required experience by 39 days?Does a tender clause providing for obtaining missing documents oblige the tender inviting authority to call for a mandatory document the bidder never mentioned?Can an unsuccessful bidder require a tender to be cancelled on the ground that only a single tenderer was left after his own bid was rejected?
Plain-language answer prepared by the LexStreak Editorial Desk — verify against the judgment. Source: Madras High Court. Corrections