2016 (12) TMI 642 - AT - Customs

Tribunal Upholds PHO Authority on Edibility Certification /2002

CC, Vijayawada Versus M/s Saraiwala Agro Refineries Ltd., M/s Sarda Agro Oil Ltd.

CC, Vijayawada Versus M/s Saraiwala Agro Refineries Ltd., M/s Sarda Agro Oil Ltd. - 2017 (349) E.L.T. 152 (Tri. - Hyd.) Issues:1. Certification authority for goods in terms of edibility and acid value - PHO vs. Chemical Examiner.Analysis:The judgment revolves around the issue of certification authority for goods concerning their edibility and acid value. The appeals were filed by the department challenging the decision of the lower appellate authority, which held that the Public Health Officer (PHO) was the sole authority to certify the goods in terms of quantity, not the Chemical Examiner. The department argued that the PHO could only certify the edibility of the goods, not the acid value, which was crucial for determining benefits under Notification No. 21/2002. They also relied on a Tribunal decision in M/s Nikhil Refineries case. On the other hand, the respondents contended that as per Board Circular No. 58/2001, all consignments of edible/food products imported into India must be tested by PHOs, and clearance should only be granted after receiving the test reports. They referred to Tribunal decisions in their favor, emphasizing that only PHO and Central Food Laboratory (CFL) were competent authorities for testing edible oils.Upon hearing both sides, the Tribunal analyzed the circular and found that imported edible/food products must be tested by PHOs, and clearance should be granted based on the test reports. While the PHO certificates did not specifically mention acid values, they did certify that the samples conformed to the standards under the PFA Rules, 1955. The Tribunal noted that the standards for specific edible oils, including palm oil, were clearly laid out in the rules, and the PHO certificates adequately reflected compliance with these standards. The Tribunal concluded that the lower appellate authority's decision regarding the authority of PHO and CFL in testing the edibility of goods was correct and did not warrant any interference. They distinguished the Nikhil Refineries case, where the PHO report was insufficient, from the present case, where the PHO certificates sufficed as per the Board's instructions. Consequently, all appeals filed by the department were dismissed, upholding the lower appellate authority's orders.