2009 (10) TMI 477 - HC - Customs

Samples- the petitioner Company, engaged in the business of Trading Internationally and Domestically. It is the case of the petitioner that, after fulfilling all the formalities, he imported in all about 1897 metric tons of Lemon Toor Whole from the said M/s. Swina International Pte. Ltd., in 39 containers from Myanmar, Thereafter, the respondent Office forwarded samples of the said Lemon Toor Whole, for analysis, to the public analyst, who sent a report stating that the said sample is adulterated. Request for drawing sample for retest declined. Held that- respondent directed to send sample available for retesting by Central Food laboratory on payment of prescribed fee by petitioner for retest.

Summary

Issues:
1. Allegation of adulteration in imported goods.
2. Request for retesting of samples.
3. Compliance with legal provisions for sample retesting.
4. Court's direction for retesting and analysis.

Analysis:
1. The petitioner, a company engaged in international and domestic trading, imported Lemon Toor Whole from a Singaporean company for supply to the Andhra Pradesh State Civil Supplies Corporation Ltd. Allegations of adulteration arose when the public analyst reported the sample as adulterated. The petitioner sought permission to draw samples for retesting, which was initially declined by the respondent.

2. The respondent, through a counter affidavit, stated that samples were promptly drawn in the presence of relevant parties and forwarded for analysis. The respondent cited legal provisions from the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, stating that retesting can only be done from the sample available with the public analyst. The analysis report was provided to the party's agent but not directly to the petitioner.

3. The court, finding the need for further information, directed the Deputy Commissioner of Customs to appear with relevant records. The Customs Manual's provision regarding retesting of samples was highlighted, allowing parties dissatisfied with test results to request a retest on the remnants of the original sample. The respondent expressed willingness to send the available sample for retesting at the Central Food Laboratory, which the petitioner did not object to.

4. Based on the agreed stand of both parties, the court disposed of the writ petition with a direction for the respondent to send the sample for retesting to the Central Food Laboratory upon payment of the prescribed fee by the petitioner. The analysis report from the retest was to be provided to the petitioner, concluding the case without any costs imposed.