$1.6M Worth of Diageo Whisky, Vodka Bottles Seized in India

In this June 14, 2005 file photo, Vijay Mallya, Chairman UB Group and Shaw Wallace, poses in front of a poster showing different liquor brands of his company’s spirits business United Spirits Ltd., at a press conference in Mumbai, India. Diageo acquired a majority of United Spirits Ltd in 2014. (AP Photo/Aijaz Rahi, File)

Indian authorities have seized roughly 18,000 boxes of liquor bottles from a Diageo-owned facility after inspectors found the containers lacked required markings indicating they were made from food-grade recycled plastic, Reuters reported Monday.

The seizure is the latest regulatory setback for Diageo in India, where the spirits giant is facing increased scrutiny over product labeling, flavoring and manufacturing claims.

The Food Safety and Standards Authority of India inspected a United Spirits factory in Bengaluru last week and found that some of the company’s smaller plastic liquor bottles were marked as polyethylene terephthalate, or PET, but did not carry the government-mandated symbol identifying recycled PET as food-grade material, according to a government memo.

The bottles were seized over what officials described as concerns about food safety, misleading labeling and misbranding. Reuters reported the seizure, including the scale of the action, for the first time.

Diageo India confirmed the action, saying some of its bottles had been “quarantined by authorities until further direction.” The company said the bottles were sourced from a recycler approved by FSSAI and that the required tests had been conducted by its suppliers.

“Our products are completely safe for consumption … We are engaging with FSSAI for further direction on this matter,” United Spirits, Diageo’s Indian subsidiary, told Reuters.

The seizure affected products from more than half a dozen brands, according to government documents, including DSP Black Deluxe Whisky, Smirnoff Zesty Lime Triple Distilled Flavoured Vodka and VAT 69 blended Scotch whisky.

The action focused on smaller plastic bottles, typically holding about 180 milliliters, rather than the glass bottles used for most of Diageo’s larger-format spirits. The government documents valued the seized products and plastic material at approximately $1.6 million.

Another Setback for Diageo in India

The latest action comes just days after Indian regulators barred the sale of several Diageo and Inbrew spirits over allegations that the products contained artificial or “nature identical” flavoring substances.

FSSAI said those products were “sub-standard” because of external artificial or nature-identical flavors that it argued could allow producers to bypass traditional maturation processes or the use of natural ingredients.

Diageo’s United Spirits has disputed the concerns, saying the labels on the products in question comply with applicable laws and describing the flavoring issue as an “industry wide concern.” The company has also challenged one of the orders in court.

FSSAI has separately warned Diageo over a claim that one of its leading whiskies was “matured in American oak casks.” Reuters reported that regulators determined most of the whisky had not undergone the claimed maturation process.

The series of actions comes as FSSAI takes a harder line on labeling and compliance across India’s food and beverage industry.

India is a major market for Diageo, which recorded approximately $3 billion in revenue there for the year ended March 2026. The company has described India as its “consumer market of the decade” and competes there with other major international spirits producers, including Pernod Ricard.

The regulatory scrutiny is also affecting India’s broader alcohol industry, which Reuters estimates at roughly $40 billion annually. Many of the products under scrutiny are Indian Made Foreign Liquor, or IMFL — locally manufactured spirits designed to resemble international-style whisky, rum and other categories.

It remains unclear whether the bottle seizure applies to the same brands produced at Diageo facilities elsewhere in India or whether the action is limited to products manufactured at the Bengaluru facility.