Section 9C of DCA : Section 9C: Misbranded Cosmetics

DCA

JavaScript did not load properly

Some content might be missing or broken. Please try disabling content blockers or use a different browser like Chrome, Safari or Firefox.

Explanation using Example

Imagine a company named "Glow & Shine" that manufactures a face cream called "Radiant Youth." Upon inspection, it is found that the cream contains a blue dye that is not on the list of approved color additives as per the regulations. Additionally, the cream's label lacks the mandatory manufacturing date and list of ingredients. Furthermore, the packaging claims that the product can "reverse aging," which is scientifically unsubstantiated and therefore misleading.

In this scenario, "Radiant Youth" face cream would be considered misbranded under Section 9C of The Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 for the following reasons:

  • The cream contains a non-prescribed colour, violating clause (a).
  • The labeling does not include all the required information, violating clause (b).
  • The claim of reversing aging is false and misleading, violating clause (c).

As a result, "Glow & Shine" could face regulatory actions, including the removal of the product from the market and potential penalties.