FSSAI Food Claims: Crackdown on Misleading Labels

Why in News?

The Food Safety and Standards Authority of India has intensified scrutiny of food labels, advertisements and online product listings.

The issue came into focus after Mondelez India withdrew health and nutrient-comparison claims related to Bournvita following FSSAI action. The regulator has issued more than 150 notices to food companies in recent months over misleading advertisements, false claims and labelling non-compliance.

Companies mentioned in the regulatory scrutiny include major packaged food and beverage firms such as Nestlé India, PepsiCo, Coca-Cola India, Abbott India, Red Bull India, Danone India, Mondelez India, Ferrero India and Kenvue.

What is the Core Issue?

The issue is not only whether a food product contains permitted ingredients. The larger question is whether a company can legally and scientifically justify the claims it makes on:

• product labels
• advertisements
• e-commerce listings
• promotional banners
• online product descriptions

FSSAI is focusing on whether claims such as “healthy,” “pure,” “immunity-boosting,” “energy,” “nutrient-rich” or “100%” may mislead consumers.

Why Bournvita Matters

• Bournvita is a familiar malted drink brand in India.
• It is sensitive from a regulatory perspective because its marketing has historically been linked with children’s nutrition.
• In 2023, it came under public scrutiny over sugar content and claims about nutritional benefits.
• The latest regulatory action does not automatically mean that Bournvita is unsafe.
• The issue is whether specific health claims or nutrient-comparison claims were adequately supported by evidence.

Mondelez India has now withdrawn the claims flagged by FSSAI and removed related advertisements from e-commerce platforms.

Food Safety vs Misleading Claim

It is important to distinguish between two issues:

1. Food Safety

This deals with whether a product contains permitted ingredients and meets safety standards.

2. Food Claims

This deals with how the product is presented to consumers.

A product may be safe for consumption, but its advertisement may still be misleading if it exaggerates health benefits or creates an unsupported impression.

Meaning of “100%” and Pure Claims

FSSAI is also concerned about absolute-sounding claims such as “100%”.

In May 2025, FSSAI advised food businesses to stop using “100%” on food labels, packaging and promotional material.

Reason

Such words may create a false sense of absolute purity or superiority.

The concern is not limited to one product category. It applies to food products where terms such as:

• 100%
• pure
• natural
• healthy
• immunity-boosting
• energy

may influence consumer choice before the consumer examines the nutrition panel or ingredient list.

Why E-commerce is Under Scrutiny

FSSAI’s enforcement is no longer limited to physical product packaging in shops.

The regulator is also looking at:

• e-commerce product pages
• online banners
• marketplace listings
• food delivery platforms
• restaurants and food-service establishments

This is important because online descriptions may carry claims that are different from the physical package.

For many consumers, the purchase decision is now shaped by an online image, banner or description rather than by reading the label in a shop.

Examples of Corrective Action

1. Mondelez India

• Withdrew health and nutrient-comparison claims around Bournvita.
• Removed related advertisements from e-commerce platforms.

2. Amway India

• Removed “100%” from its “100% Pure Coconut Oil” packaging and promotion.
• Dropped the “Energy Drink” descriptor from its caffeinated XS products.

3. Juza Foods

• Agreed to withdraw claims related to:
  • immunity
  • stronger bones
  • comparative calcium benefits
    from its baby-food products.

These examples show that FSSAI is targeting both nutrition claims and absolute purity claims.

What FSSAI is Trying to Change

FSSAI wants food businesses to move from broad marketing language to evidence-backed claims.

The regulator is pushing companies to ensure that:

• health claims are scientifically supported
• nutrient comparisons are not misleading
• words like “pure” and “100%” do not create false impressions
• online and offline product claims remain consistent
• consumers are not misled by promotional language

This is also linked with broader concerns about obesity, unhealthy diets and consumer awareness.

Significance

1. Consumer Protection

The crackdown protects consumers from exaggerated or misleading claims.

2. Public Health

It supports better food choices at a time when India faces rising concerns over obesity and unhealthy diets.

3. Regulatory Accountability

It shows that food companies must justify claims with evidence.

4. Digital Marketplace Regulation

By including e-commerce listings, FSSAI is adapting food regulation to changing consumer behaviour.

5. Transparency in Food Marketing

It encourages companies to use clearer and more responsible food communication.

Challenges

• Consumers may already have been exposed to misleading claims for years.
• Removing a claim from one platform may not remove it everywhere.
• Online listings can change rapidly.
• Monitoring thousands of digital product pages is difficult.
• Companies may use indirect marketing language to create similar impressions.
• Consumers may not always read nutrition labels carefully.
• Corrective action after notice may be temporary unless routine compliance improves.

Way Forward

1. Evidence-Based Claims

All health and nutrition claims should be supported by scientific evidence.

2. Stronger Monitoring

FSSAI should continuously monitor labels, advertisements and e-commerce listings.

3. Uniform Online and Offline Compliance

Claims on packaging and online product pages should be consistent.

4. Clear Consumer Awareness

Consumers should be educated to check ingredient lists and nutrition panels.

5. Accountability of Platforms

E-commerce platforms should be made responsible for misleading claims displayed on their pages.

6. Routine Compliance

Food companies should treat claim verification as regular compliance, not only as a response to notices.

Conclusion

FSSAI’s action against misleading food claims marks an important shift in food regulation. The focus is no longer limited to whether a product is safe; it also includes how the product is marketed to consumers. In a growing packaged-food and e-commerce market, words such as “pure,” “healthy,” “immunity,” “energy” and “100%” can strongly influence buying behaviour. Therefore, evidence-based labelling, strict digital monitoring and consumer awareness are essential for protecting public health and consumer rights.