<?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>2022 (1) TMI 1499 - TELANGANA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=465274</link>
    <description>The regulatory framework under the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 permitted controlled use of ethephon in sachets to generate ethylene gas for artificial ripening, provided it was not sprayed directly on fruit and remained consistent with food safety regulations. The challenged direction was treated as within the authority&#039;s power because it related to food safety administration and did not conflict with the statutory scheme. A separate government order encouraging En-Ripe as a safer alternative source of ethylene gas was read as a non-mandatory policy instruction, not a prohibition on ethephon, and therefore did not call for interference.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 19 Jan 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 15 Dec 2025 10:44:22 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=871379" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (1) TMI 1499 - TELANGANA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=465274</link>
      <description>The regulatory framework under the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 permitted controlled use of ethephon in sachets to generate ethylene gas for artificial ripening, provided it was not sprayed directly on fruit and remained consistent with food safety regulations. The challenged direction was treated as within the authority&#039;s power because it related to food safety administration and did not conflict with the statutory scheme. A separate government order encouraging En-Ripe as a safer alternative source of ethylene gas was read as a non-mandatory policy instruction, not a prohibition on ethephon, and therefore did not call for interference.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 19 Jan 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=465274</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>