CCPA fines two companies for misleading '100%' claims on food labels
The Central Consumer Protection Authority (CCPA) has imposed a penalty of Rs 1 lakh each on two major food and beverage companies — Mrs. Bectors Food Specialities Ltd and Storia Foods and Beverages Pvt Ltd — for running misleading advertisements and engaging in unfair trade practices. The products in question prominently used '100%' claims on their packaging and promotional materials, which the CCPA found to be factually incorrect.
The orders, passed this month, invoke the Consumer Protection Act, 2019. The CCPA relied on Section 2(28), which defines a 'misleading advertisement' as one that falsely describes a product, gives a false guarantee or deliberately conceals important information. It also used Section 2(47), which defines an 'unfair trade practice' as making false representations about the standard, quality or composition of goods.
The regulatory backdrop was set by the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI). In an advisory issued in May last year, the food regulator noted a growing trend of brands using the '100%' term, and underlined that its use 'is likely to convey a false sense of absolute purity or superiority, potentially leading consumers to believe that competing products in the market do not comply with prescribed standards.'
Case 1: '100% Atta Bread'
The CCPA took suo-motu cognisance of advertisements for Mrs. Bectors Food Specialities Ltd's '100% Atta Bread' and '100% Whole Wheat Bread'. During proceedings, the company admitted that the actual wheat flour (atta) content in the bread was only 87%. It defended the '100%' label by arguing that it was meant to convey that wheat flour was the 'sole grain source' used, without any refined flour (maida). The company also relied on FSSAI labelling regulations, which state that for a bread to be classified as 'Whole Wheat Bread', it must contain a minimum of 75% whole wheat flour.
The CCPA rejected this, noting that while FSSAI regulations prescribe a minimum 75% threshold to classify a product as atta bread, this cannot be 'elevated into a justification for making an unqualified and absolute claim such as '100% Atta Bread'.' It observed that an average consumer would reasonably construe the label to mean the product is entirely composed of atta. 'The use of the qualifier '100%' is absolute, unequivocal, and admits of no dilution or interpretative flexibility,' the CCPA said, adding that a product falling short of this literal meaning renders the claim factually incorrect.
Case 2: '100% Tender Coconut Water' and Juices
Similar legal reasoning was applied in the case against Storia Foods and Beverages. The CCPA investigated the company's '100% Tender Coconut Water' and various '100% Juice' variants, including pomegranate and mixed fruit. It found that Storia's coconut water was not fresh from the fruit but was reconstituted from a 9.6% coconut water concentrate. Likewise, its '100% Juice' variants consisted predominantly of water, with fruit pulp or concentrate ranging between 4% and 16%. The company had also made unsubstantiated health claims on its website, alleging its coconut water 'Combats Virus' and 'Kills Fatigue'.
Storia contended that the FSSAI permits the reconstitution of juices from concentrates. The company argued that because its manufacturing process was legally compliant and because it had included a disclaimer on the back label, the claims were not misleading. The CCPA, however, held that the prominence of the '100%' claim on the front label, with a disclaimer on the back, could not cure the misleading nature. It stated that consumers are unlikely to read fine-print disclaimers and that the overall impression from the label must be truthful.
The CCPA ordered both companies to immediately discontinue the misleading advertisements and to pay the penalty. The orders serve as a reminder that absolute claims like '100%' must be factually accurate and not create a false impression of purity or superiority.
