<?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>1977 (6) TMI 107 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=272609</link>
    <description>A firm cannot be convicted under the Act without a specific charge, because it is entitled to notice and an opportunity to defend itself; the firm&#039;s conviction was therefore set aside. Evidence from the Food Inspector, a supporting witness, the cash memo and the analyst&#039;s report was sufficient to prove that mustard oil and mustard seeds were stored for sale and were adulterated, so the second appellant&#039;s conviction was sustained. Considering the appellant&#039;s age and the time elapsed since conviction, the custodial sentence was reduced to the period already undergone while the fine was maintained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 24 Jun 1977 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 22 May 2018 10:26:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=519733" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1977 (6) TMI 107 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=272609</link>
      <description>A firm cannot be convicted under the Act without a specific charge, because it is entitled to notice and an opportunity to defend itself; the firm&#039;s conviction was therefore set aside. Evidence from the Food Inspector, a supporting witness, the cash memo and the analyst&#039;s report was sufficient to prove that mustard oil and mustard seeds were stored for sale and were adulterated, so the second appellant&#039;s conviction was sustained. Considering the appellant&#039;s age and the time elapsed since conviction, the custodial sentence was reduced to the period already undergone while the fine was maintained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 24 Jun 1977 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=272609</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>