FSSAI files 3 adjudication cases against Nestlé India over infant nutrition claims
Synopsis
India's food regulator FSSAI has taken formal adjudication action against Nestlé India on three fronts — promotional claim violations on NAN Excella Pro Stage 1 and Lactogen Pro 1, and a double-confirmed sub-standard biotin finding in a Follow-up Formula. No penalty has been imposed yet, but the cases could redefine how infant nutrition brands market their products on Indian e-commerce platforms.
Key Takeaways
FSSAI initiated three adjudication cases against Nestlé India on 18 September 2026 .
NAN Excella Pro Stage 1 was flagged for claims related to '5 HMOs' and 'Whey Protein' ; Lactogen Pro 1 for a 'easy to digest' whey protein claim.
A Follow-up Formula sample failed laboratory analysis for biotin content — confirmed by a second Referral Laboratory .
FSSAI cited violations of Regulation 4(2) of the Foods for Infant Nutrition Regulations, 2020 , and the IMS Act, 1992 .
No final penalty has been imposed; adjudication proceedings are ongoing.
Nestlé India had not issued a response at the time of publication.
The Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI) on Friday, 18 September 2026, announced it has initiated three separate adjudication cases against Nestlé India over alleged regulatory non-compliance involving infant nutrition products, including NAN Excella Pro Stage 1 and Lactogen Pro 1. The action follows FSSAI's examination of product listings and promotional material on e-commerce platforms.
What FSSAI Found
In the case of NAN Excella Pro Stage 1, the regulator raised concerns over claims associated with '5 HMOs' and 'Whey Protein'. For Lactogen Pro 1, FSSAI flagged a promotional claim describing whey protein as being easy to digest. The regulator said it had sought clarifications from Nestlé India on these claims before proceeding.
Following its examination, FSSAI determined that the products were in contravention of Regulation 4(2) of the Food Safety and Standards (Foods for Infant Nutrition) Regulations, 2020, which restricts promotional claims and material intended to increase the saleability of infant foods. The regulator also cited Section 3 of the Infant Milk Substitutes, Feeding Bottles and Infant Foods (Regulation of Production, Supply and Distribution) Act, 1992, which prohibits the advertisement and promotion of such products.
Biotin Non-Compliance in Follow-Up Formula
Separately, FSSAI disclosed that a sample of a Follow-up Formula manufactured by Nestlé India was found to be sub-standard in its biotin content during laboratory analysis. The sample was subsequently referred to a Referral Laboratory for re-analysis, which also returned a finding of non-conformity with the prescribed biotin requirement under the Foods for Infant Nutrition Regulations, 2020.
This double-confirmed non-compliance finding forms the basis of one of the three adjudication cases, adding a nutritional adequacy dimension to what began as a promotional claims dispute.
Status of the Cases
FSSAI clarified that its notice does not indicate any final penalty has been imposed on Nestlé India at this stage. The three cases collectively concern the alleged promotional violations relating to NAN Excella Pro Stage 1 and Lactogen Pro 1, as well as the biotin content finding in the Follow-up Formula. The cases are now before adjudicating officers.
Notably, Nestlé India had not issued a public response to the regulator's notice at the time of publication.
Regulatory and Industry Context
This is not the first time India's food safety regulator has scrutinised infant nutrition marketing. The IMS Act, 1992, one of the country's stricter product-specific advertising laws, was enacted precisely to curb promotional messaging that could influence infant feeding choices — a framework that many manufacturers have historically tested. This action comes amid growing regulatory attention globally on nutritional claims in baby food, with several European and Asian regulators tightening standards on HMO and protein-related labelling in recent years.
The adjudication proceedings will determine whether penalties are warranted and, if so, their quantum. The outcome could set a precedent for how e-commerce product listings of regulated infant nutrition products are monitored going forward.
Point of View
Signalling that the regulator is adapting its surveillance to digital retail. The double confirmation of biotin non-conformity is the harder finding: a nutritional adequacy failure in a product for infants is categorically different from a labelling dispute. What this case does not yet resolve is whether FSSAI's adjudication machinery will move quickly enough to act as a credible deterrent, or whether the industry reads the absence of a final penalty as a signal that compliance is negotiable. The IMS Act has been on the books since 1992 — the question is whether this round of enforcement gives it real teeth in the age of algorithm-driven product promotion.
NationPress
18 Sept 2026
Frequently Asked Questions
Why has FSSAI taken action against Nestlé India?
FSSAI found that promotional claims for Nestlé India's NAN Excella Pro Stage 1 and Lactogen Pro 1, as listed on e-commerce platforms, allegedly violated Regulation 4(2) of the Foods for Infant Nutrition Regulations, 2020, and the IMS Act, 1992. Separately, a Follow-up Formula sample was found sub-standard for biotin content in two rounds of laboratory analysis.
What products are involved in the FSSAI adjudication cases?
Three products are implicated: NAN Excella Pro Stage 1 (flagged for HMO and whey protein claims), Lactogen Pro 1 (flagged for a 'easy to digest' whey protein claim), and an unnamed Follow-up Formula found deficient in biotin content.
Has FSSAI imposed any penalty on Nestlé India?
No final penalty has been imposed as of 18 September 2026. FSSAI's notice states that three adjudication cases have been filed; the adjudicating officers will determine whether penalties apply and, if so, their magnitude.
What is Regulation 4(2) of the Foods for Infant Nutrition Regulations, 2020?
Regulation 4(2) restricts promotional claims and marketing material for infant foods that are designed to increase their commercial saleability. It is read alongside the IMS Act, 1992, which prohibits advertisement and promotion of infant milk substitutes and related products.
What has Nestlé India said about the FSSAI notice?
Nestlé India had not issued a public response to the regulator's notice at the time of publication. The company's position on the adjudication cases has not been made available.
