Re-processing of non-conforming imported edible oil permitted where only one standard test failed and the defect was curable.

Imported hydrogenated vegetable oil that failed only the free fatty acids test was treated as non-conforming, not adulterated. Because the defect was capable of being cured by re-processing, and the test report did not show contamination or irredeemable non-compliance, confiscation was not sustained. The tribunal directed release of the consignments for re-processing under bond, with fresh testing to follow and further adjudication to be made on the reprocessed goods. A revenue circular did not prevent re-processing where a higher authority had already ordered it.

---

---

Issues: Whether the confiscation of the imported Hydrogenated Vegetable Oil and the refusal to permit re-processing were sustainable when the goods failed only one test under the food standards and the defect was capable of rectification by re-processing.

Analysis: The goods were found to satisfy the relevant standards in all respects except the test relating to free fatty acids as oleic acid. The test report did not state that the consignments were adulterated, but only that they did not conform to the prescribed standards. The material on record, including the cited laboratory communication and the analogous judicial orders relied upon, supported the view that the defect was capable of being cured by re-processing. The circular relied upon by the revenue did not bar re-processing ordered by a higher authority.

Conclusion: The confiscation was set aside and the consignments were directed to be released for re-processing under bond, followed by fresh testing and further adjudication on the reprocessed goods.

---