The Central Consumer Protection Authority (CCPA) has imposed a penalty of Rs 1 lakh on Britannia Industries Ltd for misleading advertisements that described its bread as "100% whole wheat" despite the product containing only 62 per cent wheat.
In an order dated October 22, the regulator directed the company to immediately discontinue the advertisement across all print and electronic media, including social media. Britannia has also been asked to submit a compliance report within 15 days.
The CCPA, headed by Chief Commissioner Nidhi Khare, took suo motu cognisance of the matter after noticing that the product packaging declared a wheat content of 62 per cent, contradicting the "100%" claim in its advertisements.
"In the present matter, the product admittedly contains only 62% whole wheat, while the remaining 38% comprises other ingredients, including rice bran and other constituents," the order said.
The regulator said the claim, prefixed with "100%", was prima facie misleading because it gave consumers the impression that the product was made entirely of whole wheat.
During the investigation, Britannia accepted that its "100% whole wheat bread" contained only 62 per cent wheat flour (atta). The CCPA observed that the company had continued to use the claim despite the actual composition of the product, "blatantly deceiving consumers".
The regulator also noted that the Food Safety and Standards (Advertising and Claims) Regulations, 2018, contain no provision for using the prefix "100%" before the term "whole wheat". It said falsely describing a product as "100% whole wheat" was therefore misleading under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.
According to the CCPA, the expression "100% whole wheat bread" clearly suggests to consumers that the product consists entirely of atta, without any additional ingredients.
The authority noted that Britannia had prominently used the numerical expression "100%" in multiple advertisements as a central element of its promotional strategy.
"The use of such a precise and absolute numerical qualifier is neither incidental nor innocuous, rather, it is calculated to convey to consumers a clear and unequivocal impression and absence of any dilution or admixture," the order said.
Rejecting the company's explanation that the claims were intended merely to communicate wholesomeness, the CCPA termed it "untenable" and said it could not justify a representation likely to deceive consumers.
"Accordingly, the CCPA concludes that the impugned claims constitute misleading advertisements and unfair trade practice within the meaning of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, and affect consumers as a class," the order said.