IS YOUR “HERBAL TEA” LEGALLY “TEA”? FSSAI ISSUES CLARIFICATION

By Shantam Sharma and Aishwarya Rajput

Introduction

On December 24, 2025, the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI) issued a regulatory advisory (RCD-02004/7/2025) directing food business operators, beverage manufacturers, brand owners, advertisers, and e-commerce platforms to desist from using the term “tea” for beverages that are not derived from the Camellia sinensis plant.[1] This advisory underscores a critical aspect of food labelling compliance, specifically targeting misbranding and misleading descriptions in the fast-expanding wellness beverage market. It has broader implications for consumer protection, regulatory enforcement, and legal risk in India’s food industry.[2]

Legal Definition of “Tea” in Indian Food Law

Under the standard 2.10.1 of Food Safety and Standards (Food Product Standards and Food Additives) Regulations, 2011[3], “tea” is defined as a product obtained exclusively from the leaves, buds, or tender stems of the Camellia sinensis plant. This includes traditional forms such as black tea, green tea, instant tea, and certain regional variants. Any beverage made from herbs, flowers, roots, seeds, or spices that does not contain Camellia sinensis is not legally recognised as tea under Indian food regulations.

FSSAI’s advisory reiterates that such products, despite being widely marketed as “herbal tea”, “flower tea”, “rooibos tea”, or similar names, do not qualify as tea for regulatory labelling purposes and must instead be described as herbal infusions or botanical beverages.[4]

Why the Clarification Was Needed

In recent years, a proliferation of wellness and botanical beverages has blurred the line between legally defined tea and herbal infusions. Many products marketed as “tea” contain no Camellia sinensis, yet use the term in branding, packaging, and advertising. From a regulatory standpoint, this creates the potential for misleading consumers about the true nature of the product and undermines the integrity of statutory food categories.

FSSAI’s advisory sought to realign market practices with statutory definitions, emphasising that product names should reflect true product composition and should not create inadvertent consumer misperception.

Misbranding, Penalties, and Regulatory Compliance Under the FSS Act

A central regulatory risk implicated by the FSSAI advisory is misbranding. Under the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 (FSS Act), misbranding is a standalone offence with prescribed penalties.

1. Penalty for Misbranded Food
   Section 52 of the FSS Act states that any person who manufactures, stores, sells, distributes, or imports a food product that is misbranded is liable to a monetary penalty that may extend to ₹3 lakh. In addition, the adjudicating officer has the authority to direct the correction or destruction of the misbranded articles.
2. Penalty for Misleading Advertisement
   In parallel, Section 53 of the FSS Act provides that any person involved in publishing an advertisement that falsely describes a food product or is likely to mislead consumers regarding the nature, substance, or quality of food may be liable to a penalty of up to ₹10 lakh.[5]Taken together, these provisions mean that a beverage incorrectly labelled or marketed as “tea” when it does not meet the statutory definition could attract enforcement action not only for misbranding but also for misleading advertising.

Branding, Advertising, and Digital Marketplace Impact

The FSSAI advisory affects multiple layers of product representation:

1. Product Labels must accurately reflect the composition and nature of the beverage without implying that it is tea unless it meets the statutory definition.
2. Marketing Collateral, including advertising scripts, influencer content, and campaign messaging, must avoid language that could mislead a reasonable consumer into believing a non-tea product is tea.
3. E-Commerce Listings must be carefully curated to ensure that product titles, descriptions, and categories are compliant, with the term “tea” reserved only for those beverages that satisfy the Camellia sinensis requirement.

A failure in any of these areas can attract not only regulatory notices and fines but also reputational risk, especially as consumer awareness around health and wellness claims increases.

Consumer Protection and Policy Rationale

From a policy perspective, the FSSAI’s clarification aligns with the central goal of food law: to enable informed consumer choice and prevent deceptive practices. Tea has cultural and economic significance in India, with a long-standing tradition and a well-defined place in both domestic markets and international trade. By ensuring that only products meeting the statutory definition are labelled as tea, regulators help preserve product authenticity and safeguard consumer expectations.

Practical Compliance Measures for Food Business Operators

In light of the advisory and associated penalties, businesses should consider implementing the following compliance measures:

1. Conduct a Detailed Product Audit to identify any instances where the term “tea” is used inconsistently with product composition.
2. Revise Packaging and Product Names to remove non-compliant terms and adopt accurate descriptors such as “herbal infusion” or “botanical beverage”.
3. Review Advertising Content, including digital ads and social media campaigns, to ensure alignment with regulatory definitions and avoid inadvertently misleading claims.

Proactive compliance enhances brand credibility, reduces regulatory risk, and aligns commercial practice with statutory requirements.

Conclusion

FSSAI’s clarification on the use of the term “tea” in product labelling represents a significant regulatory affirmation of statutory definitions over commercial conventions. By strictly tethering the word “tea” to the Camellia Sinensis species, the regulator is signalling a move toward uncompromising consumer transparency in the wellness and proprietary food sectors.

For food business operators (FBOs) and e-commerce platforms, the immediate priority must be a comprehensive audit of product portfolios to mitigate the substantial financial and reputational risks associated with misbranding under Sections 52 and 53 of the FSS Act.

Ultimately, brands that integrate regulatory compliance into their product strategy will be better positioned to innovate and grow responsibly. In the evolving landscape of Indian food law, accurate labelling is no longer just a compliance checkbox; it is a critical pillar of brand equity and long-term market sustainability.

[1] Access advisory at chrome- https://fssai.gov.in/upload/advisories/2025/12/694c01c199e30Orldler%20dated%2024%20Dec%2025.pdf

[2] Available at https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/industry/cons-products/food/fssai-clarifies-only-camellia-sinensis-products-can-be-called-tea/articleshow/126190090.cms?from=mdr

[3] https://www.fssai.gov.in/upload/uploadfiles/files/Compendium_Food_Additives_Regulations_20_12_2022.pdf

[4] https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/assam/what-qualifies-as-tea-fssai-clarifies/article70436221.ece

[5] https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1766145/

Our Coverage on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:7414539137644670976