https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=74157 Food adulteration law treats permitted colouring as exceptional, and only the foods expressly covered by Rule 29 may use coal-tar colours. On a common-parlance reading of the rules and Appendix B, supari or betel-nut does not fall within "fruit-products" or "flavouring-agent" for that purpose. The article also states that liability under the scheme is strict, so a bona fide but mistaken interpretation of the rule does not displace the offence or create a defence based on ignorance of law. The statutory classification of the product and the objective meaning of the rule therefore control the legal result. en-us Tue, 17 Jan 1989 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 08 Feb 2017 16:02:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=74157 Food adulteration law treats permitted colouring as exceptional, and only the foods expressly covered by Rule 29 may use coal-tar colours. On a common-parlance reading of the rules and Appendix B, supari or betel-nut does not fall within "fruit-products" or "flavouring-agent" for that purpose. The article also states that liability under the scheme is strict, so a bona fide but mistaken interpretation of the rule does not displace the offence or create a defence based on ignorance of law. The statutory classification of the product and the objective meaning of the rule therefore control the legal result. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 17 Jan 1989 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=74157