Food additives and labelling under the FSS Act: separate regulation, curable import defects, and remand on filled chocolates.

Food additives are treated as distinct from food under the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006, because they are substances not normally consumed as food and are regulated through separate statutory provisions. The packaging and labelling regime under Section 23 and the 2011 regulations applies to packaged food, and is not mechanically extendable to food additives without specific regulatory cover. Imported goods with labelling defects may have the deficiency cured in India before release by the person dealing with the goods after import. For filled chocolates containing vegetable fat in the filling, the scope of the prohibition required regulatory determination, so the issue was remitted while the interim position in favour of the importer continued.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether a food additive is distinct from food under the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006; (ii) Whether Section 23 of the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 and the Food Safety and Standards (Packaging and Labelling) Regulations, 2011 apply to food additives; (iii) Whether defects in labelling of imported goods can be cured in India before release; (iv) Whether filled chocolates containing vegetable fat in the filling violate Regulation 2.7.4 of the Food Safety and Standards (Food Products Standards and Food Additives) Regulations, 2011.

Issue (i): Whether a food additive is distinct from food under the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006

Analysis: The statutory definitions treat "food" as something intended for human consumption, while "food additive" is a substance not normally consumed as food by itself and intentionally added for technological purposes in food manufacture or processing. The inclusive wording of the definition of food does not displace the essential requirement of human consumption. The scheme of the Act also separately recognises food additives through specific provisions dealing with standards, regulation and monitoring.

Conclusion: A food additive is distinct from food.

Issue (ii): Whether Section 23 of the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 and the Food Safety and Standards (Packaging and Labelling) Regulations, 2011 apply to food additives

Analysis: Section 23 is directed to packaged food products and the regulations framed under it are likewise confined to foods. Since food additives are treated separately in the Act, the packaging and labelling regime under Section 23 cannot be mechanically extended to food additives. The Act remains wide enough to regulate food additives through other provisions, including those dealing with standards and additive control, but the food labelling code cannot be applied to them without specific regulatory provision.

Conclusion: The packaging and labelling regulations do not apply to food additives.

Issue (iii): Whether defects in labelling of imported goods can be cured in India before release

Analysis: For imported goods, the statutory obligation under the labelling regime is effectively to be discharged by the person in India who imports or first deals with the goods, because the foreign manufacturer is outside the Act's territorial reach. No statutory bar was identified against making up a labelling deficiency in India before customs release, and doing so serves the object of labelling by ensuring relevant information is available before the goods enter commerce.

Conclusion: The labelling defect in imported goods is curable in India before release.

Issue (iv): Whether filled chocolates containing vegetable fat in the filling violate Regulation 2.7.4 of the Food Safety and Standards (Food Products Standards and Food Additives) Regulations, 2011

Analysis: Regulation 2.7.4 contains an absolute prohibition against chocolates containing vegetable fat other than cocoa butter, but the text also separately defines filled chocolates as products with an external chocolate coating and a distinct centre. The scope of the prohibition and its application to fillings was considered unclear and required expert regulatory determination. The matter was therefore not finally decided on merits, and the prevailing view in the meantime was allowed to operate until the authority took a reasoned decision.

Conclusion: The question was referred back to the regulatory authority for decision, with the interim view in favour of the importer to continue meanwhile.

Final Conclusion: The appeal concerning food additives was dismissed, while the appeal concerning filled chocolates was partly allowed with the issue of vegetable fat in the filling remitted to the regulatory authority and the interim position in favour of the importer maintained.

Ratio Decidendi: A statutory regime framed for packaged food cannot be extended to food additives unless the Act or valid regulations specifically so provide, and imported labelling deficiencies may be cured in India by the person responsible for dealing with the goods after import.

---