FSSAI Issues 150-Plus Notices Over Food Advertising and Labelling Violations

FSSAI Issues More Than 150 Notices to Food and Beverage Companies Over Advertising, Claims and Labelling Compliance

India's food-safety regulator has intensified scrutiny of the country's food and beverage industry, issuing more than 150 notices in recent months over misleading advertisements, false or inadequately supported claims and non-compliance with labelling regulations.

The Food Safety and Standards Authority of India has identified a wide range of major companies and brands during the enforcement drive, including Nestlé India, PepsiCo, Coca-Cola India, Mondelez India, Danone India, Ferrero India, Abbott India, Red Bull India, Monster Energy India and Hell Energy.

Alcohol companies including Diageo and Pernod Ricard have also faced regulatory scrutiny, demonstrating that the campaign extends across packaged food, beverages, nutritional products, energy drinks and alcoholic beverages.

The enforcement activity signals a broader shift in Indian food regulation: claims appearing on labels, packages, advertisements and digital commerce platforms are increasingly being examined as closely as the physical safety of the product itself.

FSSAI Says More Than 150 Notices Have Been Issued

FSSAI disclosed that more than 150 notices have been sent to food and beverage businesses in recent months.

The regulator identified three broad areas of concern:

misleading advertisements,

false or unsupported claims,

and labelling non-compliance.

These categories cover a large portion of how packaged food is marketed to consumers.

A product can therefore comply with manufacturing standards but still face regulatory action if the information used to sell it is inaccurate or potentially misleading.

Major Consumer Companies Are Under Scrutiny

The enforcement campaign includes some of India's largest food and beverage businesses.

Companies named in connection with recent regulatory action include:

Nestlé India,

PepsiCo,

Coca-Cola India,

Mondelez India,

Danone India,

Ferrero India,

Abbott India,

Red Bull India,

Monster Energy India,

Hell Energy,

Diageo,

Pernod Ricard,

and Kenvue.

The presence of major multinational brands makes clear that the regulator is not limiting enforcement to smaller or less-established operators.

Notices Do Not Automatically Mean Final Violations

A regulatory notice is an important compliance action, but it should not automatically be interpreted as a final finding of wrongdoing.

Companies generally receive an opportunity to:

respond,

provide supporting information,

change labels,

modify advertisements,

or take other corrective action.

The final outcome can vary according to the nature and seriousness of each case.

Several companies have already modified products or advertising after receiving FSSAI notices.

Some Companies Have Corrected Labels and Advertising

Recent enforcement has resulted in companies revising how products are presented to customers.

Dabur India, Ferns N Petals, Lotte India and other businesses have taken corrective steps following regulatory scrutiny involving product classification, labelling and advertising.

Changes have included:

revising product listings,

removing unsupported claims,

changing labels,

and withdrawing or modifying promotional material.

This demonstrates that FSSAI is using notices not simply to identify problems but to force changes in market behaviour.

‘100%’ Claims Have Become Major Focus

One particularly visible area of enforcement involves products marketed using claims such as “100%.”

FSSAI has challenged the use of such language where it could create an inaccurate impression about a product's composition, purity or characteristics.

Companies including Amway India, Emami and Bonn Biscuits have withdrawn or modified certain claims following regulatory intervention.

The issue highlights how apparently simple marketing language can carry important legal implications.

Why ‘100%’ Can Be Misleading

Consumers may interpret “100%” as meaning:

completely pure,

entirely natural,

free from additives,

or consisting entirely of one ingredient.

But the actual product formulation may be more complicated.

If marketing creates an impression inconsistent with the ingredient list or legal classification, regulators may consider the claim misleading.

This places greater responsibility on companies to ensure that promotional language accurately reflects the product.

Product Classification Matters

Food regulations often define categories very precisely.

A company cannot necessarily describe a product using whichever term is most commercially appealing.

The classification may depend on:

ingredients,

processing methods,

composition,

and prescribed regulatory definitions.

Misclassification can affect both labelling and advertising.

Companies therefore need legal and technical review before launching products or changing marketing language.

Ingredient Declarations Are Increasingly Important

Consumers rely on ingredient lists when making purchasing decisions.

Incorrect or incomplete declarations can create both safety and consumer-protection concerns.

Ingredients may matter to people because of:

allergies,

dietary choices,

medical recommendations,

or personal preferences.

FSSAI's enforcement therefore reinforces the requirement that product information be accurate and understandable.

Claims Must Be Supported by Evidence

Food and beverage marketing increasingly uses claims involving:

health,

nutrition,

performance,

energy,

natural ingredients,

and functional benefits.

These claims can influence consumers strongly.

Regulators therefore expect companies to maintain evidence supporting them.

A claim that cannot be substantiated may expose the company to enforcement even if the underlying product itself is safe to consume.

Health Claims Carry Higher Compliance Risk

The regulatory stakes increase when marketing suggests a health benefit.

Consumers may interpret such statements as scientific or medical assurances.

Companies therefore need to ensure that claims do not exaggerate what available evidence can support.

This is particularly important for:

nutrition products,

supplements,

functional beverages,

and children's food products.

Energy Drinks Are Receiving Stronger Scrutiny

Energy-drink companies including Red Bull, Monster and Hell Energy have been named among businesses receiving notices.

The category has attracted growing regulatory attention because marketing often centres on:

energy,

performance,

alertness,

and lifestyle positioning.

Ingredient disclosures and the way performance-related claims are communicated can therefore become important compliance issues.

Beverage Marketing Is Highly Competitive

India's beverage market has expanded rapidly.

Companies compete across:

carbonated drinks,

energy drinks,

juices,

functional beverages,

and hydration products.

Strong marketing helps brands differentiate themselves.

But more aggressive marketing can also increase regulatory risk if claims move beyond what product composition or evidence can justify.

Alcohol Companies Are Also Under FSSAI Lens

The enforcement campaign extends into India's large alcoholic-beverage industry.

Diageo and Pernod Ricard have both faced recent FSSAI scrutiny.

Regulators have examined issues including:

labelling,

flavouring,

product descriptions,

and production compliance.

The sector is particularly complicated because alcohol is regulated through several overlapping national and state-level systems.

Whisky Labelling Has Become Regulatory Issue

One recent case involved scrutiny of wording used on whisky labels describing maturation in American oak casks.

The regulator questioned whether the wording accurately represented the composition of the product when different components had undergone different ageing processes.

The broader lesson for the industry is significant.

Premiumisation frequently relies on detailed product stories involving:

ageing,

ingredients,

origin,

and manufacturing techniques.

Those stories increasingly need to withstand regulatory examination.

Premium Brands Face Higher Claims Risk

Premium food and beverage brands often justify higher prices through specialised claims.

These may relate to:

provenance,

natural ingredients,

craft production,

ageing,

or health attributes.

The more specific the claim, the greater the need for evidence.

Regulatory scrutiny can therefore directly affect brand positioning.

Packaging Is Part of Consumer Communication

FSSAI's remit extends beyond the food inside a package.

Packaging itself communicates information.

The regulator can examine:

ingredient declarations,

nutritional information,

mandatory warnings,

claims,

logos,

and packaging-material disclosures.

This means compliance is a multidisciplinary responsibility involving regulatory, marketing, legal and packaging teams.

Quick-Commerce Platforms Are Also Being Examined

FSSAI's enforcement is expanding beyond manufacturers.

The regulator has issued 12 notices to quick-commerce platforms, including services such as Flipkart Minutes and Amazon Now.

This reflects the rapid growth of digital food retail in India.

Online platforms increasingly function as major food-distribution channels and therefore face greater responsibility for the products and information appearing on their marketplaces.

Amazon Warehouse Licence Was Cancelled

FSSAI data also indicated that the licence of an Amazon warehouse was cancelled as part of broader enforcement activity.

Warehouse compliance matters because food safety extends through the supply chain.

Products can become non-compliant through:

poor storage,

temperature failures,

expired inventory,

or inadequate handling.

Digital retail therefore does not remove physical food-safety responsibilities.

Quick Commerce Creates New Regulatory Challenge

Rapid-delivery businesses promise products within minutes.

That requires dense networks of warehouses and dark stores.

As these networks expand, regulators need to ensure that speed does not come at the expense of:

storage standards,

licensing,

inventory control,

and product traceability.

FSSAI's notices show that quick commerce is moving into a more mature regulatory phase.

Food-Service Chains Are Also Under Scrutiny

More than 30 notices have been issued to food-service establishments including major chains such as:

KFC,

Pizza Hut,

Domino's,

Costa Coffee,

and McDonald's.

This broadens the enforcement campaign beyond packaged products.

Restaurants and cafés have their own obligations involving food safety, menu information and consumer disclosures.

Hotels and Restaurants Face Menu-Labelling Requirements

More than 20 notices have also been issued to food-service establishments including major hotel and restaurant operators.

International hotel groups named in reporting include:

Marriott,

Hilton,

Hyatt,

Radisson Hotel Group,

Four Seasons,

and Shangri-La.

Some violations relate to calorie disclosure and menu labelling.

These requirements are intended to give consumers clearer nutritional information when eating outside the home.

Calorie Disclosure Is Becoming Part of Food Regulation

Restaurant regulation historically focused heavily on hygiene.

Modern policy increasingly includes nutritional transparency.

Large food-service businesses may need to disclose calorie information for menu items.

This reflects changing consumer expectations around:

nutrition,

obesity,

and informed choice.

Food regulation is therefore extending from food safety into information quality.

Advertising Is Moving Beyond Television

FSSAI's advertising enforcement now operates in a much more complicated media environment.

Food brands promote products through:

television,

social media,

influencers,

ecommerce listings,

quick-commerce apps,

and digital advertising.

A misleading claim can therefore spread across millions of consumer interactions almost instantly.

Regulators need to evaluate marketing across all of these channels.

Ecommerce Listings Are Effectively Advertising

A product page on an online marketplace is not merely a digital shelf.

It can contain:

claims,

images,

descriptions,

reviews,

and promotional banners.

These elements influence purchasing decisions.

Companies therefore need to treat ecommerce content with the same compliance discipline applied to packaging and television advertisements.

Influencer Marketing Creates Additional Risk

Food brands increasingly use influencers to communicate with younger consumers.

Influencers may describe products using informal language that has not passed through conventional corporate compliance systems.

That creates risk.

If an influencer repeats an unsupported nutritional or health claim as part of a paid campaign, the brand can face reputational and potentially regulatory consequences.

Marketing Teams Need Stronger Regulatory Review

The current enforcement environment suggests that compliance cannot remain isolated inside legal departments.

Advertising and brand teams need to understand food regulations before campaigns are published.

Companies may increasingly require pre-release review of:

packaging,

social posts,

influencer scripts,

and ecommerce descriptions.

This could slow campaign execution but reduce enforcement risk.

Digital Marketing Speed Can Create Compliance Problems

Modern brands operate quickly.

A company can launch dozens of advertisements within a day.

Performance-marketing teams constantly test:

headlines,

images,

discounts,

and claims.

This speed creates a risk that compliance review becomes inconsistent.

Large FMCG companies may therefore need automated or centralised systems for checking marketing material before publication.

AI Advertising Could Increase Complexity

Generative AI can create thousands of marketing variations quickly.

That offers efficiency but also creates a new regulatory challenge.

Every generated advertisement needs to remain compliant.

If an AI tool invents or exaggerates a health claim, the company may still be responsible for the final communication.

Strong human oversight will therefore remain necessary.

Claims Management Could Become a Data Function

Large consumer companies may increasingly maintain central databases showing which claims have been legally and scientifically approved.

Marketing systems could then draw only from authorised language.

This would reduce the risk of one regional team or external agency inventing unsupported claims.

AI could eventually help monitor the market for non-compliant variations.

Consumer Awareness Is Rising

Indian consumers are becoming more attentive to food labels.

Interest is growing around:

sugar,

protein,

calories,

ingredients,

and ultra-processed foods.

Social-media discussions can quickly amplify concerns about products.

This creates additional pressure on companies to communicate accurately even before regulators intervene.

Label Transparency Is Becoming Competitive Issue

Compliance can also become a brand advantage.

Companies that provide simple and transparent information may build greater consumer trust.

Consumers increasingly compare ingredient lists between competing products.

Clear labels can therefore support commercial differentiation rather than representing only a regulatory burden.

Clean-Label Marketing Needs Care

Terms such as:

natural,

clean,

pure,

and healthy

can sound simple but may create regulatory problems when poorly defined.

Brands need to ensure that consumers are not given a stronger impression than the product composition supports.

The regulatory direction suggests vague positive language will increasingly be scrutinised.

Food Companies Face Reputation Risk Beyond Fines

The direct financial cost of a regulatory notice may be manageable for a large FMCG company.

The reputational effect can be greater.

Consumers may question:

product quality,

brand honesty,

or corporate governance.

This makes rapid corrective action important.

Companies need to communicate clearly when issues concern labelling rather than physical food safety.

Product Recalls Can Be More Expensive

In more serious cases, companies may need to:

withdraw products,

change packaging,

or reformulate.

These actions can create substantial costs involving:

inventory write-offs,

new packaging,

logistics,

and lost sales.

Preventing compliance problems before launch can therefore be significantly cheaper.

Packaging Changes Create Supply-Chain Costs

A label modification may sound simple.

For a national consumer brand, it can affect millions of packages.

Existing inventory may need to be used, relabelled or destroyed.

Printing plates may need to change.

Factories and distributors need updated instructions.

Regulatory compliance therefore has direct operational and working-capital consequences.

Reformulation Can Affect Consumer Preference

If a regulator requires a company to change ingredients or remove certain components, the product's:

taste,

texture,

or performance

may change.

Consumers may notice.

This creates a commercial challenge for brands attempting to remain compliant without weakening customer loyalty.

Enforcement Could Reshape Advertising Language

The more actively FSSAI challenges claims, the more conservative food advertising may become.

Companies may move away from broad declarations and toward language that is:

specific,

measurable,

and supported by evidence.

This could improve overall information quality in the market.

Scientific Substantiation Will Become More Valuable

Consumer companies may invest more heavily in clinical, nutritional and product research to support premium claims.

A scientifically demonstrated benefit can become an important commercial asset.

It allows the brand to differentiate while reducing regulatory risk.

Research therefore becomes part of marketing infrastructure.

Startups Face Same Rules as Large Brands

India's D2C food industry has expanded rapidly.

Young companies frequently build brands around claims such as:

high protein,

no added sugar,

natural,

or preservative-free.

These businesses face the same fundamental obligation to ensure claims are accurate.

Smaller companies may have less regulatory expertise, creating additional risk.

D2C Brands Need Compliance Early

A startup can change a website quickly.

It cannot always change thousands of packages already manufactured.

Regulatory review should therefore happen before large-scale production.

This becomes especially important when brands raise capital and expand nationwide.

Compliance failures can slow growth just when distribution is accelerating.

Investors May Examine Regulatory Risk More Closely

Consumer-company investors increasingly need to consider compliance quality.

A fast-growing brand relying heavily on aggressive claims may face greater risk than its revenue numbers suggest.

Due diligence can therefore include:

label review,

licensing,

claim substantiation,

and past regulatory notices.

Strong compliance can improve the durability of a consumer brand.

Retailers Also Carry Responsibility

Supermarkets, ecommerce platforms and quick-commerce companies are becoming more important gatekeepers.

They may increasingly demand stronger documentation from sellers.

Platforms do not want non-compliant products creating regulatory problems inside their distribution systems.

This could make compliance certification more important for gaining retail access.

India’s Food Market Is Becoming More Formal

The enforcement push is part of a broader shift toward formalisation.

Packaged-food consumption is expanding.

Organised retail is growing.

Digital commerce provides greater traceability.

These developments make it easier for regulators to identify products and enforce standards.

Informal practices that once escaped scrutiny can become harder to sustain.

Regulatory Enforcement Can Benefit Responsible Companies

Stricter enforcement can impose costs.

But it can also create a more level playing field.

A company investing in:

testing,

accurate labels,

and responsible advertising

should not have to compete against rivals making unsupported claims.

Consistent enforcement can therefore benefit businesses that already maintain strong standards.

FSSAI Is Expanding From Safety to Trust

The regulator's recent actions reveal a broader interpretation of food safety.

A product is not fully compliant merely because it does not make consumers physically ill.

Consumers also need accurate information.

Misleading claims can affect purchasing choices and health decisions.

Trust therefore becomes part of the regulatory framework.

FMCG Boards May Need Greater Oversight

For large listed consumer companies, repeated regulatory problems can become governance issues.

Boards may need stronger visibility into:

advertising compliance,

product claims,

labelling systems,

and regulatory interactions.

Compliance responsibility increasingly extends beyond manufacturing and quality-control departments.

Industry Could See More Centralised Compliance

Large food groups operate numerous brands.

Each brand may run multiple campaigns simultaneously.

Companies may increasingly centralise regulatory approval to maintain consistency.

Technology systems can help track which wording is approved for:

which product,

which market,

and which channel.

This could reduce accidental violations.

Consumer Protection Will Remain Core Driver

The underlying objective of FSSAI's enforcement campaign is consumer protection.

Food purchasing decisions are highly dependent on information supplied by the seller.

Consumers usually cannot independently test:

ingredients,

nutrition,

or production methods.

They therefore depend heavily on labels and advertising being truthful.

Strong enforcement attempts to reduce that information imbalance.

Conclusion

FSSAI's decision to issue more than 150 notices to food and beverage companies marks a significant escalation in regulatory scrutiny of how India's consumer brands advertise, classify and label their products.

The enforcement has reached major companies across packaged food, beverages, energy drinks and alcohol, including Nestlé India, PepsiCo, Coca-Cola India, Mondelez India, Danone India, Ferrero India, Red Bull India, Monster Energy India, Diageo and Pernod Ricard.

The regulatory campaign is also expanding beyond manufacturers.

Quick-commerce platforms, warehouses, restaurant chains and major hotels have faced notices involving food-safety, menu-labelling and other compliance requirements.

For companies, the message is increasingly clear: food regulation now extends across the entire consumer journey.

The product formulation must comply.

The ingredient list must comply.

The package must comply.

The advertisement must comply.

And the digital product listing must comply.

As food marketing becomes increasingly competitive and AI allows companies to create advertising at unprecedented speed, maintaining accurate, substantiated and consistent claims will become a more important part of both regulatory compliance and brand management.

For India's food industry, stronger enforcement may increase near-term compliance costs. But over time, it could also create a market in which transparent labels, defensible claims and responsible advertising become increasingly important sources of consumer trust.