<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2016 (1) TMI 794 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=271002</link>
    <description>The court directed an authorized FSSAI officer to inspect the imported food items, draw samples, and ensure compliance with labeling regulations. The petitioner was not to incur additional testing costs, and the case was set for further hearing to ensure immediate compliance and avoid delays. The court clarified that proprietary foods are not entirely excluded from the FSS Act and should only be prohibited if unsafe or containing prohibited ingredients, criticizing FSSAI&#039;s blanket rejection of proprietary foods.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 18 Jan 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 12 May 2016 18:39:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=413983" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (1) TMI 794 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=271002</link>
      <description>The court directed an authorized FSSAI officer to inspect the imported food items, draw samples, and ensure compliance with labeling regulations. The petitioner was not to incur additional testing costs, and the case was set for further hearing to ensure immediate compliance and avoid delays. The court clarified that proprietary foods are not entirely excluded from the FSS Act and should only be prohibited if unsafe or containing prohibited ingredients, criticizing FSSAI&#039;s blanket rejection of proprietary foods.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 18 Jan 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=271002</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>