Created by Fuzzy Cloud | Our 2nd AI-Powered Solution
4 judgments · newest first · showing 1–4
The State of Gujarat appealed against the acquittal of two accused distributors of Amul Shakti milk, alleging that the milk packs were misbranded under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act because the manufacturing date on the label (26‑01‑2005) differed from the date the sample was taken …
The original complainant, a government Food Inspector, filed a complaint under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 alleging that milk sold by the respondents was adulterated. The Public Analyst and later the Central Food Laboratory confirmed the milk was sub‑standard, and the trial court …
The Commissioner of Central Excise issued notices to M/s Tata Tea Ltd demanding cess on its 'instant tea' under Section 25 of the Tea Act, 1953. The company contended that 'instant tea' was not 'tea' as defined in Section 3(n) and therefore the notices were illegal. The Tribunal set aside the …
The appellant was prosecuted under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 for selling camel's milk to a food inspector, the milk having 25% added water. The trial court acquitted him on the ground that no specific standard existed for camel's milk, but the Rajasthan High Court convicted him, …
