Last Updated:
An independent 2026 assessment reveals that 33.6% of food labelling claims in India are non-compliant or unverified. Why stricter FSSAI norms are critical for consumer trust.
Dr Rashida Vapiwala highlights that nearly one in three food labelling claims in India fails compliance, underscoring the urgent need for transparent, evidence-backed packaging practices.
A comprehensive independent assessment released in early 2026 has spotlighted significant gaps in food labelling compliance across India’s packaged food industry. Analysing 5,058 individual claims across 586 products from 227 brands spanning 18 categories and 21 claim types, the study found that 33.6% of claims were either non-compliant with regulations (21.3%) or lacked sufficient substantiation and required further verification (12.3%).
“In simple terms, roughly one in three claims on packaged foods does not fully align with existing standards,” says Dr. Rashida Vapiwala, Founder and CEO, LabelBlind.
These standards include regulations set by the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI), guidelines issued by the Advertising Standards Council of India (ASCI), and relevant provisions under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.
A Regulatory Inflection Point
The findings arrive at a pivotal moment for India’s food ecosystem. FSSAI has intensified scrutiny in recent years, issuing advisories against vague “100%” descriptors such as “100% natural” or “100% pure” in mid-2025. In April 2025, it introduced a consumer reporting mechanism through the Food Safety Connect app. Most significantly, a firm “no proof, no claim” requirement for health, nutrition, immunity, or functional claims came into effect on January 1, 2026.
“The regulatory landscape is no longer tolerant of loosely worded or poorly substantiated claims. Brands must now back their statements with robust scientific evidence, which places greater responsibility on internal processes and early-stage decision-making,” explains Dr. Vapiwala.
Adding to this momentum, the Supreme Court has recently urged FSSAI to examine the introduction of front-of-pack warning labels, citing rising health concerns linked to excessive sugar, saturated fat, and salt content.
Front-of-Pack Claims Drive Decisions and Risk
In busy retail environments, front-of-pack claims such as “high fibre,” “heart healthy,” “rich in protein,” and “supports immunity” often influence purchasing decisions more than detailed nutrition tables on the back panel.
“Consumers make rapid decisions in-store,” says Dr Vapiwala. “They rely heavily on front-of-pack messaging as shorthand for health benefits.”
When a significant portion of these claims prove inaccurate, unsubstantiated, or misleading, the consequences extend beyond individual purchasing errors. They affect public health, nutrition literacy, and trust across millions of households.
Everyday Staples Show the Highest Non-Compliance
The most concerning lapses appear in widely consumed, daily-use products:
Honey: 80% of health claims failed compliance checks
Ghee: 65.5%
Tea and herbal infusions: 54.3%
Edible oils: 52.9%
Additional categories flagged include packaged snacks (27.3%), flour (24.8%), plant-based beverages (nearly 29%), ready-to-eat meals (28.6%), and dairy-based ready-to-drink beverages (27.1%).
“These are not niche indulgences. They are staples in Indian households. That amplifies the scale and impact of non-compliance,” notes Dr Vapiwala.
Health and Nutrient Messaging Under Pressure
Nearly 40% of total claims analysed fall into nutrient- or health-related categories. Nutrient content claims such as “source of protein,” “rich in iron,” or “high fibre” account for 22.8% of all claims, with over a quarter found to be non-compliant.
Even more concerning are nutrient-linked health claims (16.3% of total claims), which show a combined non-compliance and verification-needed rate of 52.5%.
“Statements like ‘good for heart health,’ ‘nutritional powerhouse,’ or ‘diabetic friendly’ can easily cross into therapeutic territory,” Dr Vapiwala explains. “Without rigorous backing, such claims risk misleading consumers and attracting regulatory action.”
Particular Concern for Child-Targeted Categories
Products positioned for children including snacks, ready-to-drink beverages, dairy drinks, and nutritive mixes show elevated non-compliance rates.
“In child-focused categories, the stakes are significantly higher,” says Dr. Vapiwala. “Overstated marketing can influence long-term dietary habits and health outcomes.”
Claim Overload and Consumer Confusion
The average product analysed carries 8.6 claims. However, several categories exceed this average: honey products carry approximately 14 claims per pack, snacks average 13, and edible oils average 11. Emerging “health-forward” segments such as protein powders and plant-based beverages often carry even more.
“This creates what we call a ‘wall of promises,’” says Dr Vapiwala. “More claims do not necessarily mean more clarity. In fact, excessive messaging can overwhelm consumers and increase the likelihood of inaccuracies slipping through.”
Structural Gaps Require Industry Reform
The findings suggest systemic challenges rather than isolated lapses. Compliance processes are often addressed late in the product lifecycle instead of being embedded during formulation and marketing strategy development.
“As innovation accelerates in functional foods, plant-based alternatives, and fortified products, manual compliance checks struggle to keep pace,” explains Dr Vapiwala.
With enforcement tightening, consumer reporting tools now active, and regulatory scrutiny increasing, the packaged food industry faces a critical juncture.
“Proactive, evidence-based labelling must become the norm,” she emphasises.
Key measures include:
Reducing claim volume for greater clarity
Embedding compliance early in product development
Applying rigorous substantiation standards to health and nutrient claims
Strengthening controls on lifestyle and ethical statements
Introducing enhanced safeguards in child-focused categories
Implementing digitised systems linking claims to real-time regulatory updates and scientific evidence
Trust as the Ultimate Benchmark
Ultimately, addressing these gaps is not merely about avoiding penalties.
“This is about rebuilding and sustaining consumer trust,” concludes Dr Vapiwala. “Informed, healthier choices depend on reliable information at the point of purchase. The industry has an opportunity to lead meaningful reform toward transparent and credible labelling.”
At a time when consumers are more health-conscious than ever, accurate labelling is not just regulatory compliance, it is a public responsibility.
February 15, 2026, 15:11 IST