Back
2011 Supreme(Cal) 352
HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
INDIRA BANERJEE, J.
Gokul Refoils And Solvents Ltd - Appellants
Vs
Union Of India - Respondents
Decided on: March 11, 2011
R.K. Chaudhary, R.Bharadwaj, Sidhartha Chatterjee, Ratul Biswas
Imported food items not conforming to the standards prescribed under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act and the Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules cannot be processed or reprocessed to bring them into conformity with the prescribed standards.
Headnote:
PREVENTION OF FOOD ADULTERATION ACT, 1955 - SECTIONS 5, 2(IA), 2(V) - CUSTOMS ACT, 1962 - SECTIONS 2(25), 2(33), 11A, 47 - IMPORT OF PALM OIL - STANDARDS AND REGULATIONS - PROCESSING OF IMPORTED FOOD - REPROCESSING OF SUBSTANDARD GOODS - NO LEGAL RIGHT TO REPROCESS - WRIT PETITION DISMISSED.
Fact of the Case:
Petitioner imported two consignments of Crude Palm Oil from Indonesia, but the Customs Authorities withheld clearance due to high acid value, exceeding the permissible limit under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act (PFAA) and the Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules (PFA Rules). The petitioner sought an order to allow reprocessing of the imported palm oil to bring it into conformity with the prescribed standards.
Finding of the Court:
1. The petitioner's imported palm oil was deemed adulterated under Section 2(ia) of the PFAA due to its high acid value, exceeding the permissible limit of 10.00. 2. Under Section 5 of the PFAA, import of adulterated food or food items not conforming to prescribed standards is prohibited. 3. Palm oil imported into India must be refined before human consumption and conform to the standards laid down in Appendix 'B' of the PFA Rules. 4. The Customs Authorities were justified in withholding clearance of the consignments based on the Central Food Laboratory's test reports showing acid value exceeding the permissible limit. 5. There is no provision in the Customs Act or related rules, regulations, notifications, or circulars that allows for the release of imported food subject to reprocessing.
Issues: 1. Whether the imported palm oil, with an acid value exceeding the permissible limit, was deemed adulterated under the PFAA. 2. Whether the Customs Authorities were justified in withholding clearance of the consignments based on the test reports showing non-conformity with prescribed standards. 3. Whether the petitioner had a legal right to reprocess the imported palm oil to bring it into conformity with the prescribed standards.
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that the imported palm oil was deemed adulterated under Section 2(ia) of the PFAA due to its high acid value, exceeding the permissible limit of 10.00. 2. The court found that under Section 5 of the PFAA, import of adulterated food or food items not conforming to prescribed standards is prohibited. 3. The court held that palm oil imported into India must be refined before human consumption and conform to the standards laid down in Appendix 'B' of the PFA Rules. 4. The court opined that the Customs Authorities were justified in withholding clearance of the consignments based on the Central Food Laboratory's test reports showing acid value exceeding the permissible limit. 5. The court concluded that there is no provision in the Customs Act or related rules, regulations, notifications, or circulars that allows for the release of imported food subject to reprocessing.
Final Decision: The writ petition was dismissed as the petitioner did not have a legal right to reprocess the imported palm oil to bring it into conformity with the prescribed standards.
1. THIS writ application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed seeking orders on the respondent authorities to allow the petitioner to process the imported consignments of Crude Palm Oil imported into India under Bills of Entry Nos. 2471693 and 2471923 dated December 23, 2010, to bring the same to conform to the standards laid down under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1955 and the rules framed thereunder.
2. THE petitioner, a company incorporated under the provisions of Companies Act, 1956 operates a unit for manufacture of refined palm oil. On December 23, 2010 the petitioner imported two consignments of Crude Palm Oil of the Edible Grade from Indonesia covered by Bills of Entry No.2471693 and 2471923. On arrival at the Port of Haldia requisite documents were filed for clearance of the consignments.
Section 5 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, hereinafter referred to as the PFAA, provides as follows:-
"Section 5. Prohibition of import of certain articles of food No person shall import into India- (i) any adulterated food; (ii) any misbranded food; (iii) any article of food for the import of which a licence is prescribed, except in accordance with the conditions of the licence; (iv) any article of food in contravention of any other provision of this Act or of any rule made thereunder."
3. SECTION 2(v) of the PFA defines 'food' to mean any article used as food or drink for human consumption other than drugs and water and includes any article which is used in human food. Palm oil is admittedly 'food' within the meaning of the PFAA.
4. UNDER Section 2(ia) of the PFAA an article of food is to be deemed to be adulterated in any of the circumstances specified in sub- clauses (a) to (n) of the said section. Clause (a) of Section 2(ia) of the PFAA, provides that an article of food shall be deemed to be adulterated, if it is not of the nature, substance or quality which it purports or is represented to be and Clause (d) of the said sub-section provides that an article may be deemed to be adulterated if it contains any ingredient which renders it injurious to health. Similarly an article of food may also be deemed to be adulterated under Section 2(ia)(l) if the quality or purity of the article falls below the prescribed standard or its qualities are present in quantities not within prescribed limits of variability which renders it injurious to health. In any case, Section 5 of the PFAA not only prohibits import of adulterated food but also import of any food, that is, in contravention of any provision of PFAA or any rules framed thereunder.
In exercise of power conferred by the PFAA, the Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules, 1955, hereinafter referred to as "the PFA Rules", have been framed. The standards of quality of various items of food have been specified in Appendices B, C and D to the PFA Rules. Paragraph- A.17.19 of Appendix 'B' which gives the requisite specification for Palm Oil, is set out here in below for convenience:-
"A.17.19 PALM OIL means the oil obtained from fleshy mesocarp of fruits of the oil palm (Elaeis guinesis) tree by the method of expression or solvent extraction. It shall be clear, free from rancidity, suspended or other foreign matter, separated water, added colouring and flavouring substances or mineral oil. It shall conform to the following standards, namely:
(a) Butyro-refractometer reading at 50-C 35.5-44.0 or Refractive index at 50-C 1.4491-1.4552
(b) Melting point (capillary slip method) Not more than 37?C
(c) Iodine value (Wijs' method) 45-56
(d) Saponification value 195-205
(e) Unsaponifiable matter Not more than 1.2 per cent Acid value Not more than 10.0 1 [Indigenously produced raw palm oil obtained by method of expression may be supplied for human consumption as such provided acid value is not more than 6.0. But palm oil imported into the country or produced by solvent extraction shall be refined before it is supplied for human consumption and it
