FSSAI Clarifies Position on Identical Flavours in Alcoholic Beverages

On August 2, 2026, FSSAI issued a clarification that draws a clear line: the regulator is not banning flavours in alcoholic beverages. The real issue is the use of flavours that copy the exact characteristics a standardised spirit is expected to develop naturally through its raw materials and production process.

The issue is not flavouring itself

Alcoholic beverages get their sensory identity from a combination of raw materials, fermentation, yeast, distillation, maturation and other recognised production steps.

Rum’s character, for example, comes from its raw material and how it is made. Whisky’s identity is shaped by the grains, fermentation, distillation and ageing.

According to FSSAI, some manufacturers have been taking neutral or extra-neutral alcohol and simply adding external flavours designed to imitate rum or whisky. These products are then sold under the names of the standardised categories.

That is where the regulator has stepped in.

FSSAI’s position is straightforward: if a product does not naturally meet the characteristics of a standardised category and relies on added identical flavouring to recreate those characteristics, it should not be presented to consumers as a conventional product of that category.

Under the Food Safety and Standards (Labelling and Display) Regulations, 2020, the name on the front of the pack must reflect the true nature of the food. In practical terms, a product made mainly from neutral spirit and given a rum-like flavour may need to be labelled as a rum-flavoured spirit rather than simply “rum.”

What the laboratory tests showed

FSSAI collected samples of rum and whisky from multiple manufacturers and sent them for testing.

The labs found external artificial or nature-identical flavours in certain products and judged them non-conforming to the applicable standards. The regulator specifically pointed to the requirement that rum must possess the characteristic taste and aroma associated with the product.

The concern is not whether a flavouring substance is technically permitted. It is whether that flavouring is being used to manufacture an imitation of a standardised alcoholic beverage, and whether the final product is labelled in a way that honestly tells consumers what they are buying.

Natural and nature-identical flavours are not banned

One of the most important points in the clarification is that natural and nature-identical flavouring substances remain allowed where the regulations permit them and where there is a legitimate technological purpose.

Manufacturers can continue to use flavours such as coffee, vanilla and other permitted substances in alcoholic beverages when the rules allow it.

The regulatory concern is different when a manufacturer adds the flavour of the standardised alcoholic beverage itself. FSSAI compares this to adding coffee flavour to coffee or tea flavour to tea. If the defining sensory characteristics are expected to come from the product itself, simply adding an identical flavour to recreate them does not count as a proper technological function under the regulations.

That distinction could matter a great deal for manufacturers producing value-oriented spirits from neutral alcohol.

Age claims are also under the microscope

The FSSAI action is not limited to flavouring.

The regulator also raised concerns about age-related claims on blended spirits. It cited the example of a rum carrying a “7 years old blended” claim where, according to the investigation, the majority of the product was neutral, unmatured or unaged spirit, and the matured rum component made up less than 5% of the blend.

Under the applicable regulations, the age statement for a blend must reflect the youngest spirit in the blend. A small quantity of older spirit cannot be used to support an age claim for a product whose main component is younger or unaged.

For consumers, the principle is simple: an age statement should accurately describe the product being purchased, not just highlight the age of one small part of the blend.

Enforcement is widening

FSSAI said prohibition-of-sale orders were issued against several manufacturers after non-conforming laboratory reports. The action covered products in both the rum and whisky categories. Inspections and sampling were also carried out at a distillery in Goa, and notices were issued to other manufacturers in Maharashtra, with further action expected.

In two cases, conditional revocation of the prohibition orders was granted after appeals. Existing stock could be sold provided the true nature of the product was clearly shown on the front of the pack, while future production was directed not to use identical flavours such as rum flavour in rum or whisky flavour in whisky.

This suggests the regulatory response is not only about removing products from the market. Correct labelling and changes to future production practices can also form part of the compliance path.

What this means for the Indian spirits industry?

The development is likely to put greater focus on how Indian spirits are formulated, categorised and labelled.

For manufacturers, the message is becoming clearer: it is not enough for an ingredient to appear on an approved list. Companies also need to consider why the ingredient is being used, what the resulting product actually is, and whether the label accurately communicates that to consumers.

This will be particularly relevant for products made from neutral or extra-neutral alcohol that are then modified to resemble established spirit categories.

At the same time, FSSAI has stressed that the action should not be read as a finding against the entire alcoholic beverage industry. Many manufacturers continue to produce standardised alcoholic beverages in line with the prescribed requirements.

A push toward greater transparency

The latest clarification could ultimately encourage more transparency around product composition, production methods and category definitions in the Indian spirits market.

For consumers, the difference between a standardised spirit and a flavoured spirit may become more visible on labels.

For manufacturers, it may lead to closer attention to raw materials, maturation, formulation and documentation of production processes.

And for the industry as a whole, it reinforces a basic principle: a product’s name and presentation must reflect what is actually inside the bottle.

FSSAI’s position is less about banning flavouring and more about preventing flavouring from being used to create a misleading impression of a standardised alcoholic beverage.

As enforcement continues, manufacturers in India’s spirits market will be watching closely to see how these principles are applied across different categories, formulations and labels.