https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=194063 The High Court upheld the rejection of the application for quashing the complaint under The Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940. The Court found the report of the analyst to be conclusive, stating that the appellants did not express intention to controvert the report within the specified time frame. It was emphasized that the manufacturer must notify intention to adduce evidence within the time limit, and as the appellants had been previously informed of the non-standard quality, the appeal was dismissed for lacking merit. en-us Thu, 28 Jul 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 28 Aug 2017 13:01:53 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=194063 The High Court upheld the rejection of the application for quashing the complaint under The Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940. The Court found the report of the analyst to be conclusive, stating that the appellants did not express intention to controvert the report within the specified time frame. It was emphasized that the manufacturer must notify intention to adduce evidence within the time limit, and as the appellants had been previously informed of the non-standard quality, the appeal was dismissed for lacking merit. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 28 Jul 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=194063