https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=309575 Section 2(1)(j) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act was construed with the colouring-matter rules to determine when adulteration occurs. Rule 23 prohibited colouring matter except as permitted, Rules 28 and 29 identified the permitted dyes and the foods to which they could be added, and Rule 30 fixed limits for permitted colours. To avoid an absurd result and preserve the scheme of the rules, the word "and" in Section 2(1)(j) was read disjunctively as "or". On that reading, the presence of any non-permitted colouring matter in food itself constituted adulteration, without proof that the quantity exceeded prescribed limits. en-us Fri, 14 Aug 1964 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 11 Sep 2023 15:31:09 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=309575 Section 2(1)(j) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act was construed with the colouring-matter rules to determine when adulteration occurs. Rule 23 prohibited colouring matter except as permitted, Rules 28 and 29 identified the permitted dyes and the foods to which they could be added, and Rule 30 fixed limits for permitted colours. To avoid an absurd result and preserve the scheme of the rules, the word "and" in Section 2(1)(j) was read disjunctively as "or". On that reading, the presence of any non-permitted colouring matter in food itself constituted adulteration, without proof that the quantity exceeded prescribed limits. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 14 Aug 1964 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=309575