Allow Cookies!
By using our website, you agree to the use of cookies
In an appeal filed by Britannia before the Supreme Court of India, the Apex Court said that the produce which the company claimed to be outside the ambit of agricultural products do actually fall within the term “Agricultural Produce”. The Company appealed against the High Court order which stated that Sugar is an agricultural produce which is processed from sugarcane, and the absence of the term “manufacture’ in section 2(1)(a) of the Maharashtra Agricultural Produce Marketing (Regulation) Act, 1963, validates the fact that sugar is an agricultural produce.
The High Court also said that Edible oil and Vanaspati fall within the ambit of section 2(1)(a) of the act. The Hon’ble bench of the Supreme Court concurred with the view of the High Court and said that there is no merit that could warrant the intervention of the apex court with the impugned order of the High Court.
Vanaspati is processed from edible oil, and the latter is subjected to various processes, and the end product is Vanaspati. Therefore, the High Court said that Vanaspati is a hydrogenated Refined Edible oil, and the same falls within section 2(1)(a) of the Act. The Company raised a contention about the direct purchase of sugar from the sugar mills located outside the domain covered by the Bombay Agricultural Produce Marketing Committee. The Court said that the matter would be considered by the committee taking into account the bills and documents filed by the Britania Company.
86540
103860
630
114
59824