Food Safety Tribunal sets aside fine imposed on Parle Biscuits Private Limited in 2014

The food major was accused of ‘misbranding’ one of its popular products as the percentage of ingredients used at the time of manufacturing was not mentioned on the packaging

February 29, 2024 10:35 pm | Updated 11:48 pm IST - Chennai

The Tamil Nadu Food Safety Appellate Tribunal has set aside a 2014 order of the Adjudicating Officer/District Revenue Officer of Tiruvallur, directing Parle Biscuits Private Limited to pay a fine of ₹2 lakh in a case wherein the firm was accused of ‘misbranding’ one of its popular products.

The case relates to the laboratory examination of a Parle biscuit sample lifted by a Southern Railway Food Safety Officer (FSO) from a stall in Tiruvottiyur railway station in March 2013. It was sent to the food lab in Guindy. The analyst said the sample had been ‘misbranded’ since the percentage of ingredients was not mentioned on the packaging as per regulation 2.2.2.2.(f) of the Food Safety and Standards (Packaging and Labelling) Regulations, 2011. As per the provision, packaged food sold as a mixture or combination of ingredients must disclose the percentage of the components used at the time of manufacturing.

Based on the report, the Adjudicating Officer imposed a fine of ₹2 lakh on the company and ₹1,000 each on the salesman and the licensee of the shop. The company appealed that the order was “erroneous” and claimed that there was no violation of regulations as alleged by the officer. In the counter affidavit, the FSO said both the vendor and the licensee admitted to the infraction, and that “by not mentioning the percentage of ingredients, the consumers were being misled.”

S.P. Chockalingam, advocate for the appellant, citing Regulation 2.2.2.2 (f)(i), said if any ingredient was emphasised as used at the time of manufacture either through words, pictures, or graphics, then the percentage should be mentioned. Parle Biscuits Private Limited did not emphasise such usage of any of the ingredients in the label. Therefore, there is no violation, he added.

R. Selvakumar, Presiding Officer of the Tribunal, after reviewing the regulations, said the regulation under 2.2.2.2.(f) could not be applied as nothing had been claimed or emphasised as present in the label. Hence, labelling as per regulation 2.2.2.2 (b), which mandated listing the ingredients in descending order, was sufficient, he added.

0 / 0
Sign in to unlock member-only benefits!
  • Access 10 free stories every month
  • Save stories to read later
  • Access to comment on every story
  • Sign-up/manage your newsletter subscriptions with a single click
  • Get notified by email for early access to discounts & offers on our products
Sign in

Comments

Comments have to be in English, and in full sentences. They cannot be abusive or personal. Please abide by our community guidelines for posting your comments.

We have migrated to a new commenting platform. If you are already a registered user of The Hindu and logged in, you may continue to engage with our articles. If you do not have an account please register and login to post comments. Users can access their older comments by logging into their accounts on Vuukle.