Bombay HC examines FSSAI curbs on IMFL sales by liquor makers

MUMBAI: The spirits are high, but the stakes are higher. The Bombay High Court is examining a challenge by liquor manufacturers including United Spirits and Mohan Meakin against orders issued by the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI) restricting the sale of certain Indian-Made Foreign Liquor (IMFL) products.

The dispute centres on how spirits are made, flavoured and, perhaps most importantly, what their labels promise. FSSAI has raised objections to the use of artificial or nature-identical rum and whisky flavouring, as well as claims around the maturation and age of certain spirits.

At the heart of the regulator’s concerns is whether products containing such flavouring can simply be sold as rum or whisky. FSSAI’s position is that these additions could give consumers a misleading impression about the composition and maturation of the drink.

The regulator has also questioned labels claiming that spirits are “matured in cask” when a significant portion of the blend comprises neutral, unmatured spirit. FSSAI has indicated that age or maturation claims should accurately reflect the youngest component of a blend.

Its position, however, does not necessarily mean such products cannot be sold. Manufacturers can market them if the labels accurately identify the product, such as describing it as a flavoured spirit rather than presenting it as conventional rum or whisky.

For the manufacturers, the issue is not simply a matter of changing a recipe and printing a new label. United Spirits and other liquor makers have argued that the practices under scrutiny have been followed in the Indian spirits industry for decades.

During the Bombay High Court proceedings, counsel for United Spirits argued that blending matured rum concentrate with neutral spirit and using flavouring to achieve a particular taste profile were established industry practices.

The industry has also flagged the practical difficulty of immediately changing labels. Liquor packaging is subject to approvals from state excise authorities, meaning manufacturers cannot necessarily alter product descriptions overnight, particularly for stock already in the market.

The stakes could extend well beyond individual brands. Counsel for United Spirits told the court that the FSSAI orders could affect a substantial portion of the domestic spirits market, according to reports.

The Bombay High Court has recognised the wider economic implications of the regulator’s orders but has indicated that the technical questions surrounding the composition and manufacture of spirits require detailed input from FSSAI.

The court has therefore sought further clarification from the regulator.

FSSAI has maintained that its intervention is aimed at preventing consumers from being misled and that manufacturers remain free to sell the products provided their labels accurately disclose their composition.

The regulator has also rejected the industry’s suggestion that using external rum or whisky flavouring to recreate characteristics associated with maturation represents an internationally recognised manufacturing practice.

The proceedings come as FSSAI steps up scrutiny of product composition, labelling and marketing claims across the food and beverage sector, with liquor companies increasingly finding themselves in the regulator’s crosshairs.

For the spirits industry, the case could have implications beyond the products currently under scrutiny. It may shape how far FSSAI can go in regulating the composition, description and marketing of IMFL, particularly when established industry practices collide with evolving interpretations of food safety and labelling rules.

For now, the immediate question before the court is whether the affected products can continue to be sold under their existing formulations and labels while the dispute is resolved.

The larger one is harder to swallow: will familiar spirits have to change not just how they are made, but how they are described to consumers?