https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=175792 The SC held that a conviction for adulteration could not stand where butter-milk had no expressly prescribed standard of quality under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules, 1955. The Rules fixed standards for certain milk products, but butter-milk was only defined by reference to its source process and no content standard, including solids-not-fat, was laid down for it. The Court declined to imply a standard that the rule-making authority had not enacted, so the prosecution failed for want of a breached prescribed standard and the conviction was set aside. en-us Tue, 18 Jan 1966 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 05 Dec 2015 11:31:11 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=175792 The SC held that a conviction for adulteration could not stand where butter-milk had no expressly prescribed standard of quality under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules, 1955. The Rules fixed standards for certain milk products, but butter-milk was only defined by reference to its source process and no content standard, including solids-not-fat, was laid down for it. The Court declined to imply a standard that the rule-making authority had not enacted, so the prosecution failed for want of a breached prescribed standard and the conviction was set aside. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 18 Jan 1966 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=175792