McVitie's Wholewheat Marie biscuits found to contain 52% maida: CCPA

A McVitie’s biscuit marketed as “Wholewheat Marie” contained 52% refined wheat flour, or maida, while whole wheat flour accounted for only 19.5% of the product, according to an order passed by the Central Consumer Protection Authority (CCPA).

The CCPA has now held the use of the term “Wholewheat” on the packaging to be misleading and unfair. It has directed Pladis India Pvt. Ltd., formerly known as United Biscuits Pvt. Ltd., to discontinue the misleading advertisement with immediate effect and pay a penalty of Rs 1 lakh.

The matter came to the CCPA’s notice after a Mint article referred to a social media video by Harsh Goenka raising concerns about food products marketed using terms such as “healthy”, “natural” and “organic”.

The CCPA initiated a preliminary inquiry and examined the packaging of McVitie’s Wholewheat Marie biscuits. It found that while “Wholewheat” was prominently displayed on the product, the ingredient list showed that whole wheat flour made up only 19.5% of the product.

In comparison, refined wheat flour, or maida, accounted for 52%.

The authority said the prominent representation could lead consumers to believe that they were buying a biscuit predominantly or entirely made from whole wheat, which was not consistent with the actual composition.

Pladis defended the labelling by arguing that “McVitie’s Wholewheat Marie” was a registered trademark and that the word “Wholewheat” was being used as part of the brand name.

The company also argued that using the ingredient in a product's branding did not mean the biscuit had to be made entirely from that ingredient.

Pladis pointed to a disclaimer on the front of the package which stated that the expression was only a trademark and did not represent the product's true nature.

The company further said that the 19.5% whole wheat flour was disclosed as required and that “Wholewheat” was intended to identify whole wheat as a key ingredient and distinguish the product from regular Marie biscuits.

The CCPA rejected this explanation.

The authority said the fact that “Wholewheat” was part of a registered trademark did not give the company immunity from laws governing misleading advertisements and unfair trade practices.

According to the CCPA, the issue was not whether the trademark itself was valid or registrable. Instead, it examined whether the way the word was prominently displayed on the packaging could create a false impression about the product's nature and composition.

The authority said an average consumer would understand “Wholewheat” in its ordinary sense and could reasonably assume that the biscuit was made entirely or substantially from whole wheat flour.

The CCPA also rejected the argument that the word was merely meant to indicate a “key ingredient”.

The CCPA found that the disclaimer relied upon by Pladis was not sufficient to counter the prominent “Wholewheat” representation.

The authority noted that the disclaimer was printed in a disproportionately small white font against a blue background, placed at the extreme corner of the packaging and arranged vertically.

In contrast, “Wholewheat” appeared prominently in a substantially larger, capitalised and horizontal font.

The CCPA said a disclosure that is technically present but practically difficult to notice cannot reasonably be treated as sufficient to correct a prominent claim.

The investigation also noted that images of wheat stalks and grains on the principal display panel reinforced the impression created by the “Wholewheat” branding.

The investigation report described the overall packaging as an example of “interface interference”, a prohibited dark pattern under the Guidelines for Prevention and Regulation of Dark Patterns, 2023.

The authority said the packaging prominently highlighted the “Wholewheat” representation and wheat imagery while obscuring the qualifying disclaimer, potentially influencing consumers' purchasing decisions.

The CCPA also held that the labelling violated provisions relating to consumer rights, misleading advertisements and unfair trade practices under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.

During the proceedings, Pladis said it was willing to revise the pack label by removing the word “Wholewheat” from the registered trademark displayed on the packaging.

The company also said it would not place fresh orders for packaging carrying the old branding. It requested nine months to implement the revised packaging so that existing plastic packaging material could be used instead of being discarded.

The CCPA nevertheless concluded that the company's submissions did not rebut the findings of the investigation.

The CCPA has directed Pladis India to discontinue the false and misleading advertisement with immediate effect across print, electronic and social media.

It has also ordered the company to ensure that all fresh packaging for the product is modified to remove the misleading claim.

Pladis has been ordered to pay a penalty of Rs 1 lakh for misleading advertisement and unfair trade practice.

The company must also submit a compliance report to the CCPA within 15 days from the date of the August 28, 2026 order.

The authority emphasised that consumer protection law requires companies to provide truthful and accurate information so that consumers can make informed purchasing decisions.

In this case, the CCPA concluded that calling a product “Wholewheat” when it contained 19.5% whole wheat flour and 52% maida created a misleading impression about its composition.