Health Authority vide letter dated 28.3.2012 informed ACC, Cochin that the sample was unsafe as defined under Section 3(1)(zz)(iii) of Food Safety ... Director, CFTRI, Mysore and it was found that the sample is UNSAFE as defined under Section 3(1)(zz)(iii) of Food Safety and Standards
samples were also drawn for testing. The test reports received
from FSSAI Laboratory, Ghaziabad for 15 items stated " The
sample is thus unsafe under ... test report of the
samples drawn from the import consignment has categorically
mentioned that the samples are unsafe and mis-branded as per
the provisions
made after cutting the supari and adding
menthol and saccharin.
4. The sample of the product was sent for testing and the report by FSSAI ... moisture percentage
3
of 9.14% and, therefore, the sample was held to be unsafe under section 3 (1)
(zz) (x) of the FSSAI
penalty under
Customs Act, 1962 .
xxxxxx
23.1 I further observed that samples of betel nut were
drawn from 106.11 MT seized betel nut under panchnama ... FSSAI norms reported that the samples do not confirm to the
regulations No. 2.12 of proprietary food and is unsafe as per
section
penalty under
Customs Act, 1962 .
xxxxxx
23.1 I further observed that samples of betel nut were
drawn from 106.11 MT seized betel nut under panchnama ... FSSAI norms reported that the samples do not confirm to the
regulations No. 2.12 of proprietary food and is unsafe as per
section
penalty under
Customs Act, 1962 .
xxxxxx
23.1 I further observed that samples of betel nut were
drawn from 106.11 MT seized betel nut under panchnama ... FSSAI norms reported that the samples do not confirm to the
regulations No. 2.12 of proprietary food and is unsafe as per
section
penalty under
Customs Act, 1962 .
xxxxxx
23.1 I further observed that samples of betel nut were
drawn from 106.11 MT seized betel nut under panchnama ... FSSAI norms reported that the samples do not confirm to the
regulations No. 2.12 of proprietary food and is unsafe as per
section
penalty under
Customs Act, 1962 .
xxxxxx
23.1 I further observed that samples of betel nut were
drawn from 106.11 MT seized betel nut under panchnama ... FSSAI norms reported that the samples do not confirm to the
regulations No. 2.12 of proprietary food and is unsafe as per
section
penalty under
Customs Act, 1962 .
xxxxxx
23.1 I further observed that samples of betel nut were
drawn from 106.11 MT seized betel nut under panchnama ... FSSAI norms reported that the samples do not confirm to the
regulations No. 2.12 of proprietary food and is unsafe as per
section
penalty under
Customs Act, 1962 .
xxxxxx
23.1 I further observed that samples of betel nut were
drawn from 106.11 MT seized betel nut under panchnama ... FSSAI norms reported that the samples do not confirm to the
regulations No. 2.12 of proprietary food and is unsafe as per
section
