Contact us   Feedback   Subscription   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2016 (9) TMI 661 - MADRAS HIGH COURT

2016 (9) TMI 661 - MADRAS HIGH COURT - TMI - Import of Olive Oil from Turkey Compliance with the requirements of Food Safety and Standards (Packaging and Labelling) Regulations, 2011 minor violation of the requirements to be complied with can the relief granted to the petitioner on the ground that the consignment which they have imported largely satisfies the labelling requirements under the Regulation and they were ready to explain the minor discrepancies pointed out by the authorised off .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

India, Court would not venture into disputed questions nor it would have expertise to find out as to whether what has been mentioned in Turkey language is in fact the name of the company or other details to verify the serial number, batch number etc. - The ingredients which are contained in the product should be disclosed in the label as required under the Regulations - these issues being technical matters have to be considered by the competent authority under the Food Safety and Standards A .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

.1 and 2 of 2015 - Dated:- 3-6-2016 - THE HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAM For the petitioner : Mr.Hari Radhakrishnan For the respondent : Ms.H.Yasmeen Ali Standing counsel for FSSAI, Mr.T.Chandrasekaran SPC ORDER The petitioner has filed this writ petition praying for issuance of a writ of certiorarified mandamus to quash the order passed by the 1st respondent, who is the authorised officer functioning under the provisions of the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006. 2. The petitioner had i .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

014 and 03.02.2015. The sum and substance of the contention raised in those letters are that the petitioner sought to clarify that the consignment which they have imported largely satisfies the labelling requirements under the Regulation and they were ready to explain the minor discrepancies pointed out by the authorised officer. At that relevant point of time, the petitioner filed a writ petition before this Court in W.P.No.20409 of 2015, by which, the petitioner challenged the report of the au .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ns in the meanwhile and report the outcome to the Court. Pursuant to which, the petitioner appeared before the authority and made their submissions and after hearing the petitioner, the authority has passed the order dated 24.11.2015 which is impugned in this writ petition. Owing to the fact that already an order had been passed, the earlier writ petition stood dismissed as withdrawn. 3. I have elaborately heard Mr.Hari Radhakrishnan, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms.H.Yasmeen Ali, lear .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ttles) and Extra Virgin Olive Oil (500 ml & 1000 ml in PET Bottles and Pure Olive Oil (5 Liter Tins) and Extra Virgin Olive Oil (5 Liter Tins). 5.It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the objection raised by the 1st respondent stating that in the 5.15 kg Drums, the labels does not contain the prefix producer or manufacturer is untenable as the label clearly shows that the source/seller and the product is a quality product from Turkey and the petitioner has produced s .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

he labelling requirement and there are only minor issues which can be considered by the authority and the one time relaxation could be granted. In support of his contention, the learned counsel placed reliance on the decision of the Delhi High Court in the case of United Distributors Incorporation Vs. Union of India and another in W.P.(C).No.3708 of 2014 dated 20.08.2014. 6.The learned standing counsel appearing for the 1st respondent submitted that the most important point to be first taken not .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

and unless and until, the petitioner satisfies the requirement in full, the question of certifying the product does not arise. Further, it is submitted that the petitioner had submitted a representation on 01.10.2015 to the 1st respondent requesting for relaxation of the norms. But however, the authority who is competent to grant relaxation is only the Director (Imports), Food Safety and Standards Authority of India, FDA Bhavan, Kotle Road, New Delhi 110 002 and if at all the petitioner seeks f .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

, this observation should not be mistaken to state that the product is not a quality product nor it is unfit for human consumption, in fact that is not the stand of the 1st respondent themselves. Being conscious of the fact that this Court is exercising jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, this Court would not venture into disputed questions nor it would have expertise to find out as to whether what has been mentioned in Turkey language is in fact the name of the company .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version