Latest Updates News Dairy News Dairy Products Food News

Amul refutes violation in promoting its new infant formula, says ‘we are in complete compliance with the IMS Act’

May 25, 2025

53

Amul has denied any violation of IMS Act. ‘We remain committed to all the guidelines of BPNI regarding promotion of infant food in India,’ the company said. This comes after BPNI alleged Amul violated Infant Milk Substitutes (IMS), 1992.

The Breastfeeding Promotion Network of India (BPNI), an organisation working to protect, promote and support breastfeeding practices, has filed a complaint with the Union government against Amul for allegedly promoting its newly launched liquid ready-to-feed infant formula, which is listed on their website. BPNI claims that the dairy giant violated the Infant Milk Substitutes, 1992.

Amul Refutes any claims

Amul has denied any violation of any guidelines.

Amul responded to the BPNI’s claims and said that the company “remains committed to all the guidelines of BPNI”.

“Amulspray is one of India’s oldest and most trusted infant milk food brands and is in complete compliance with the IMS Act. The link mentioned by you in your post is not active. We remain committed to all the guidelines of BPNI regarding promotion of infant food in India,” Amul’s customer care stated on

What does the complaint say?

Dr. Arun Gupta, MD, FIAP (Ped), coordinator at BPNI took to X to flag it, stating, “BPNI makes a formal complaint to concerned authorities requesting for actions to protect children’s health @MoHFW_INDIA @fssaiindia @NCPCR_ @MinistryWCD. Violations of IMS Act undermine breastfeeding. This time its @Amul_Coop.” He further questioned, “Why it is so difficult to abide by the law?”

In a complaint to Ministry of Health, Ministry of Women and Child Development, FSSAI, NCPCR, for a quicker action and compliance, the BPNI stated, “The promotion of infant formula by @Amul_Coop, as reported is in direct contravention of Section 9 of the IMS Act, 1992, which prohibits all forms of advertising and promotion of infant milk substitutes. The use of a teddy bear image further violates Section 6(2) of the Act.”

*The first page of the complaint filed by BPNI*

It cited Section 2(g) of the IMS Act, which defines “infant milk substitute” as any food marketed or represented as a replacement for mother’s milk for infants up to two years of age; Section 2(i), which defines promotion as encouraging any person to purchase or use an infant milk substitute; and Section 6, which prohibits the use of graphics or phrases that enhance the saleability of infant milk substitutes.