The Central Consumer Protection Authority (CCPA) has imposed fines of Rs 1 lakh each on Mrs. Bectors Food Specialities Ltd and Storia Foods and Beverages Pvt Ltd for misleading advertising practices. Both companies faced scrutiny for their use of “100%” claims on product packaging that CCPA deemed deceptive. The authority ordered the immediate cessation of these advertisements,emphasizing that fine-print disclaimers do not rectify misleading claims prominently displayed on the front of products .
In its ruling,the CCPA invoked the Consumer Protection Act, 2019,specifically citing provisions that define misleading advertisements and unfair trade practices. authority's actions were influenced by advisory from the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI), which noted an increasing trend of brands using the term “100%” without a clear definition in advertising regulations. The FSSAI warned that such claims could mislead consumers into believing that competing products do not meet established standards .
The case against Mrs. Bectors centered on its “100% Atta Bread” and “100% Whole Wheat Bread.” During the investigation,the company acknowledged that its bread contained only 87% wheat flour. It defended its labeling by claiming that “100%” designation referred to the absence of refined flour. However,the CCPA rejected this argument,stating that consumers would interpret “100%” to mean the product is entirely made of wheat flour. The authority pointed out that claim was misleading, as the actual content did not align with the absolute assertion made on the packaging.
Similarly,the CCPA scrutinized Storia’s “100% Tender Coconut Water” and various “100% Juice” products. investigation revealed that coconut water was derived from 9.6% concentrate,while the juice variants contained only 4% to 16% fruit pulp or concentrate. Storia had also made unverified health claims,suggesting that its coconut water could combat viruses and alleviate fatigue. The company argued that its manufacturing process complied with FSSAI regulations and that disclaimers on the back of packaging justified “100%” claim. Yet, CCPA maintained that compliance with manufacturing standards does not excuse misleading marketing practices.
The authority emphasized that disclaimers in small print do not mitigate the misleading nature of bold claims on the front. In its ruling,the CCPA stated that ordinary consumer would expect “100% Tender Coconut Water” to be in its natural form,not reconstituted from concentrate . The CCPA’s decisions reflect a shift in consumer protection principles, moving from a “let buyer beware” approach to a “let the seller beware” standard, placing greater responsibility on companies to ensure their advertising is truthful and not misleading.
