Labelling defects in imported chocolates can be cured by non-detachable stickers; vegetable fat in the filling is not prohibited

Packaged food imported into customs warehouse must meet mandatory labelling requirements under the Food Safety and Standards framework, including disclosure of the manufacturing date. A missing label detail can be cured by affixing a non-detachable sticker that remains attached and supplies the required particulars, because the labelling rules aim at consumer information rather than rigid form. For filled chocolates, the prohibition on vegetable fat applies to the external chocolate shell or coating, not to the filling material. Vegetable fat in the filling therefore does not by itself make the consignment non-compliant.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the imported chocolates were non-compliant with the mandatory labelling requirements, and if so, whether the defect was curable by affixing a non-detachable sticker; (ii) Whether filled chocolates containing vegetable fat in the filling part were non-compliant with the chocolate standard under the food additive regulations.

Issue (i): Whether the imported chocolates were non-compliant with the mandatory labelling requirements, and if so, whether the defect was curable by affixing a non-detachable sticker.

Analysis: Section 23 of the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 read with the labelling regulations requires packaged food to bear specified labelling particulars, including date of manufacture or packing. The labels on the goods disclosed the best-before date but did not mention the manufacturing date. However, the definition of "label" is broad enough to include matter attached to the package, and the regulations do not prohibit rectification by a sticker if it remains affixed and does not separate from the container. The object of labelling is consumer information, and that object can be satisfied by a non-detachable sticker carrying the necessary particulars. The defect was therefore capable of being cured in the customs warehouse.

Conclusion: The labelling defect was curable, and the petitioner was entitled to rectify it by affixing a non-detachable label containing the required particulars.

Issue (ii): Whether filled chocolates containing vegetable fat in the filling part were non-compliant with the chocolate standard under the food additive regulations.

Analysis: Regulation 2.7.4 of the Food Safety and Standards (Food Products Standards and Food Additives) Regulations, 2011 prohibits vegetable fat other than cocoa butter in chocolate, but the definition of filled chocolate treats the filling as distinct from the external chocolate coating. The prohibition on vegetable fat applies to the chocolate shell or coating, not to the filling material. The reasoning is supported by the Codex definition of filled chocolate and by the authority's own earlier clarification allowing vegetable fat in the filling part of filled chocolates. Since the shell itself contained no prohibited vegetable fat, the objection to the filling could not sustain rejection of the consignment.

Conclusion: The filled chocolates were not -compliant merely because vegetable fat was present in the filling, and the rejection on that ground was unsustainable.

Final Conclusion: The consignment was directed to be cleared after the petitioner cured the labelling defect, and the objection based on vegetable fat in the filling was rejected.

Ratio Decidendi: For filled chocolates, the prohibition on vegetable fat under the chocolate standard applies to the external chocolate coating and not to the filling, and a labelling defect that can be cured by a compliant non-detachable sticker does not justify continued detention of the goods.

---