https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=751773 SC upheld conviction for misbranding of sugar confectionaries due to inadequate labeling under Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules, 1955. Packets lacked manufacturer's complete address and manufacturing date, violating Rule 32(c) and (f). Court applied beneficial provisions of Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006, which replaced imprisonment with monetary penalties. Considering the nature of offense and 24-year delay since 2000 incident, Appellant No. 2's three-month imprisonment with Rs. 1,000 fine was converted to Rs. 50,000 fine only. Appellant No. 1's Rs. 2,000 fine was upheld. Appeal partly allowed. en-us Thu, 07 Mar 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 25 Apr 2024 06:58:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=751773 SC upheld conviction for misbranding of sugar confectionaries due to inadequate labeling under Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules, 1955. Packets lacked manufacturer's complete address and manufacturing date, violating Rule 32(c) and (f). Court applied beneficial provisions of Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006, which replaced imprisonment with monetary penalties. Considering the nature of offense and 24-year delay since 2000 incident, Appellant No. 2's three-month imprisonment with Rs. 1,000 fine was converted to Rs. 50,000 fine only. Appellant No. 1's Rs. 2,000 fine was upheld. Appeal partly allowed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 07 Mar 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=751773