https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=356078 Mandatory food labelling norms require every package to disclose the manufacturer's name and complete address, and where applicable the packer or bottler. The article notes that the imported consignment failed this disclosure test because the supplier was not the manufacturer and the label did not satisfy the prescribed requirements. The Court treated compliance as strict, applied the relevant FSSAI regulations and guidelines, and declined to direct rectification of the defect in writ jurisdiction. It also observed that the goods had already crossed the relevant shelf-life period, which further weighed against interference. The rejection of the consignment and refusal to issue the no objection certificate were therefore upheld. en-us Tue, 24 Oct 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 26 Apr 2018 11:08:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=356078 Mandatory food labelling norms require every package to disclose the manufacturer's name and complete address, and where applicable the packer or bottler. The article notes that the imported consignment failed this disclosure test because the supplier was not the manufacturer and the label did not satisfy the prescribed requirements. The Court treated compliance as strict, applied the relevant FSSAI regulations and guidelines, and declined to direct rectification of the defect in writ jurisdiction. It also observed that the goods had already crossed the relevant shelf-life period, which further weighed against interference. The rejection of the consignment and refusal to issue the no objection certificate were therefore upheld. Case-Laws Customs Tue, 24 Oct 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=356078