9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (3) TMI 609X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er the contents matched with the declaration given in the Bill of Entry. The imported goods were also to be verified for compliance with the provisions of the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006, (hereinafter referred to as `the Act ) and the rules framed thereunder. Accordingly, the matter has been referred to the first respondent, to certify whether the goods in question had fulfilled all the necessary requirements. . 3. It had been further stated that the first respondent had refused to draw samples from the imported consignment of goods for the reason that the date of manufacture, the date of expiry and the other declarations required to be made on the products were not mentioned in the printed form, as required by the Food Safety and Standards (Packaging and Labelling) Regulations, 2011, (hereinafter referred as `the Regulations') and as the required declarations, in respect of the imported goods, had been made on a label, which had been stuck to the product. As such, the first respondent and his subordinates had refused to take samples of the imported goods, for testing, to see if such goods are fit for human consumption. Instead the first respondent had sent a letter ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... stamped or impressed on or attached to a container, cover, lid or crown of any food package and includes a product insert. Thus, it is clear that a label could be attached to the cover or the wrapper of a package. There is no Regulation which states that the declarations should only be printed directly on the cover or the wrapper of the product. 7. The learned counsel had further stated that the petitioner company had imported similar products, on previous occasions following similar labelling procedures, vide Bill of Entry No.4701753, dated 21.9.2011. The officers of the Customs Department, at Bangalore, had allowed the taking of samples for the purpose of testing the goods imported by the petitioner. The samples were tested in accordance with the requirements of the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India, and the food products imported by the petitioner had been certified to be fit for human consumption. However, in the present case, the first respondent had objected to the taking of samples from the goods imported by the petitioner, without having any proper reasons to do so. 8. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner had further stated that it wou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ith the requirements of law. 12. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents had submitted that Section 23 of the Act states that no person shall manufacture, distribute, sell or expose for sale or despatch or deliver to any agent or broker for the purpose of sale, any packaged food products, which are not marked and labelled, in the manner specified by the regulations. 13. He had further stated that Section 25 of the Act, says that no person shall import to India, any unsafe or misbranded or sub-standard food or food containing extraneous matter. He had also stated that Section 45 provides for food analysts appointed by the Commissioner of Food Safety, by way appropriate notifications. Section 46 of the Act enumerates the function of the food analysts. Section 47 of the Act prescribes the procedures to be followed by the Food Safety Officer, while taking samples for analysis. He had also submitted that the Regulations, 2011, had been made, in accordance with Section 92 of the Act. 14. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the first respondent has further submitted that, as per Regulation 2.3.2 of the Regulations, the information required under the regu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d warehouses. In this context, the label requirements which are not rectifiable are, Name of the Manufacturer; List of ingredients in descending order of composition by weight/volume; name and address of the manufacturer; information to determine date of manufacture and Best before date of expiry date; Batch no. or code no. or lot no.; Net weight or volume; and nutritional information in accordance with the provisions of the of the labelling Regulations. 17. He had also submitted that further instructions had also been issued by the Senior Inspecting Officer, Food Safety and Standards Authority of India, dated 20.5.2011. Paragraph 2 of the communication, dated 20.5.2011, reads as follows: Clearance of imported alcoholic beverages may be considered as per usual procedure subject to the condition that minor labelling defects viz.Name and address of importer, Veg./Non-Veg. Symbols and Best before/Expiry date, may be rectified in the custom's warehouse under supervision of customs department and the custom department shall ensure the labelling requirements prior to release of such consignments. This relaxation will be applicable for two months from date of issue of this let ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in a customs bonded premises, subject to mutual convenience. It had been further stated that it would be open to the Port Health Authorities to test and to certify the impugned goods before they were cleared. 21. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner had also submitted that the food safety regulations would be applicable not only to the food items, which are imported from outside India, but also to those which are manufactured within the country. The labelling procedures are similar in nature for both the imported, as well as the locally manufactured items. As such, it can be seen that most of the food items sold in the local retail outlets contain the necessary information only from the labels, which are stuck on the containers, covers or wrappers. While so, the respondents cannot insist that the necessary information, relating to the goods imported by the petitioner, should be on display on the covers or wrappers, by online printing, by the original manufacturers. There is no such specification in the food safety regulations making it mandatory for the printing of such information on the covers or the wrappers, as claimed by the respondents. When the custo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the records available, it is noted that the first respondent had refused to take samples from the goods imported by the petitioner, for sending them for laboratory testing. It is seen that the first respondent had stated, in his impugned letter, dated 12.1.2012, that the food items imported by the petitioner do not meet the labelling requirements, under the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006, and the Food Safety and Standards (Packaging and Labelling) Regulations, 2011, and therefore, the samples cannot be drawn for analysis. 27. In the note annexed to the said letter, the reason for his decision has been stated. From the said note it could be gathered that the date of manufacture, date of expiry, net weight, name and address of the manufacturer, the name and address of the importer, batch number, and the ingredients have not been mentioned in the printed form, in respect of the food items imported by the petitioner, as they have been shown only by way of a sticker, stuck over the original package. 28. Even though the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the respondents had contended that the necessary information should be displayed on the cover, wrapper or the conta ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that the goods imported by the petitioner, in wholesale packages, need not declare such particulars, contrary to the claims made by the respondents. 33. Further, from the adhoc guidelines issued by the Director of Food Safety and Standards Authority of India, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, Government of India, dated 12.10.2011, it is seen that certain labelling deficiencies can be rectified, by providing the necessary information, by affixing a label containing the necessary information. Further, the communication, dated 20.5.2011, issued by the Senior Inspecting Officer, Food Safety and Standards Authority of India, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, Government of India, makes it clear that certain minor labeling defects may be rectified, in the custom s warehouse, under the supervision of the officers of the customs department, prior to the release of the consignments. 34. Further, from the decisions cited by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, it is seen that the goods in question could be released, after proper tests are conducted to find out if they are fit for human consumption. It had also been made clear that certain deficiencies in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
