When Regulators Clash: Bombay High Court Rules Customs Cannot Arbitrarily Override FSSAI Certification

In a significant ruling for the trading community, the Bombay High Court has intervened in a dispute between the Customs Department and a private importer, affirming that the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI) is the definitive authority on the safety and quality of food imports. The court struck down the Customs Department's attempt to sideline FSSAI test reports in favor of their own re-testing procedures.

The Conflict: A Tug-of-War Over Imports

The dispute began when NBG International Private Limited imported consignments of roasted areca nuts. While FSSAI had conducted extensive testing and issued "No Objection Certificates" (NOC) confirming the goods were safe for human consumption, the Customs authorities grew skeptical. Relying on reports from the Central Revenue Control Laboratory (CRCL), the Customs officers seized the consignments and demanded steep financial guarantees and an undertaking that the goods would not be used for human consumption.

The importer, faced with escalating warehousing costs and an effective ban on their inventory, moved the High Court, challenging the seizure as both arbitrary and lacking legal authority.

Arguments from the Trenches

The petitioner-importer contended that once a statutory body like FSSAI—specifically tasked with ensuring food safety under the Food Safety and Standards Act—has certified a product, the Customs department has no legal standing to conduct secondary "re-tests" without credible evidence of error. They argued that their goods strictly conformed to the established standards and that the Customs action was a procedural reach that ignored the clear findings of the specialized food safety regulator.

Conversely, the Respondents (Union of India/Customs) argued that they were within their rights to re-examine the goods, casting doubt on the quality and the specific classification of the nuts. They pointed to the CRCL reports, which highlighted the presence of damaged nuts, to justify the seizure and the demand for a "no-use" declaration.

Bridging the Gap: The Court’s Reasoning

The Bombay High Court, represented by the division bench of Justices G.S. Kulkarni and Aarti Sathe, took a pragmatic approach. After physically examining samples in court, the judges noted that the visual distinction between raw and roasted areca nuts was clear, undermining the Customs department's classification claims.

Citing the precedent set in Make Index Impex vs. Union of India , the Court underscored that when FSSAI has provided a clean chit based on statutory parameters, the Customs department cannot adopt a contrary position without a compelling, substantiated reason. The Court emphasized that FSSAI is the specialized statutory body, and its rigorous testing process should not be treated as optional by other departments.

Key Observations

• "We are in agreement with the contentions as made on behalf of the Petitioner that once the FSSAI has cleared the imported goods as fit for human consumption... then to question the wisdom of FSSAI, would not be an appropriate approach on the part of the Respondents."
• "If such tests are applied to the several range of agricultural products domestically available from the indigenous sources, it would be impossible for any agricultural produce to have a market."
• "The FSSAI is under an onerous obligation to adhere to the strictest standards in the examination of imports, as its statutory obligation is of food safety and maintenance of the highest standards... it is only when such highest standards are achieved, a successful march in attaining international standards on food safety and public health can be ensured."

The Verdict: A Path to Clearance

The High Court ordered the immediate release of the roasted areca nuts without the burdensome financial conditions originally imposed by the Customs officers. However, the ruling balanced trade interests with public safety; the Court mandated that the importer must undergo a cleaning process for the nuts under the supervision of an FSSAI-nominated officer to ensure any damaged portions are removed before the goods enter the domestic market.

This decision serves as a stern reminder to regulatory agencies that specialized statutory findings carry significant legal weight. For the trade industry, the judgment marks a victory against bureaucratic overreach, ensuring that imports governed by food safety laws are handled by the experts best equipped to evaluate them.