Cheaper Imported Liquor Puts Indian Brands Under Pressure in Madhya Pradesh; Industry Questions Excise Policy

CIABC urges MP Government to review total state-level tax, regulatory burden on Indian-made spirits and BIO products at comparable price points and correct unjustified disparities

BHOPAL: Imported liquor may be getting cheaper in Madhya Pradesh, but the price cuts have raised concerns among Indian alcoholic beverage manufacturers, who fear that cheaper imports could put domestic brands in the premium and above categories in IMFL and Wines at a disadvantage.

Media reports suggest that prices of select imported liquor brands in Bhopal have fallen by 15% to 40% following tariff reductions under the India-UK Free Trade Agreement (FTA). While lower prices offer consumers greater choice, domestic manufacturers say the development highlights the need to review the state's excise policy and ensure a level-playing field.

Indian manufacturers are not seeking restrictions on imports. They want the government to ensure that companies investing heavily in quality, technology and premium products are not disadvantaged by taxation, regulatory barriers or unequal policy treatment. What is sought is a level playing field.

Cheaper imports, tougher competition

Price reductions in imported liquor have brought pricing disparities into focus. Lower customs duties can make foreign products more affordable, depending on applicable taxes, distribution costs and retail margins. Domestic manufacturers, meanwhile, operate under a complex state-level excise regime. Their costs include manufacturing, financing, compliance, distribution and regulatory charges. Final retail prices are also influenced by state taxes and pricing policies.

The concern is particularly relevant when tariff concessions improve the price competitiveness of imported products while Indian manufacturers continue to face domestic regulatory and cost pressures. The industry is not seeking protection from competition. It wants competition to take place under fair and transparent rules.

BIO policy under scrutiny

The treatment of Bottled-in-Origin (BIO) spirits has emerged as another concern for Indian alcoholic beverage manufacturers in Madhya Pradesh. Indian Alcobev Industry has questioned the apparent differential treatment of BIO products and whether the state's excise framework provides a consistent and objective basis for competition. It has urged the MP government to examine the applicable duties, fees, licensing conditions and pricing rules to determine whether they create an avoidable disadvantage for domestic manufacturers. Legitimate regulatory differences must be respected, but policies should not inadvertently favour imported products over Indian manufacturing.

CIABC seeks equitable, predictable excise policy framework; Atmanirbhar Bharat and Viksit Bharat must translate into fair treatment for Indian manufacturing.

According to Confederation of Indian Alcoholic Beverage Companies (CIABC), the apex body of Indian alcobev manufacturers: “Indian premium spirits have already demonstrated their ability to compete internationally on quality. The domestic brands competing with imported Scotch in the premium and above segments include award-winning single malts and luxury spirits recognised by international judges.”

Some of the accolades won by Indian alcobev companies include the Best Indian Whisky and Best Single Malt Indian Whisky award at the International Whisky Competition 2026 bagged by Indri Diwali Collector’s Edition 2025. It pipped Dewar’s Double 21 Year Old and Aberfeldy Sherry Cask 25 Year Old at the competition. Similarly, Indri Agneya won the Indian Single Malt Whiskey of the Year title at the London Spirits Competition 2026. Amrut Indian Single Malt Cask Strength won Gold at USA Spirits Ratings 2026, while Rampur Asava was named Best World Whisky at the 2023 John Barleycorn Awards. These achievements across several Indian producers reflect the capability built through sustained investment in distillation, maturation, cask selection and product development.

“Manufacturers must continue improving quality and production efficiency. However, manufacturing efficiency cannot correct an imbalance created by taxation. A comparison based solely on shelf prices is incomplete without examining the total state duties, fees and regulatory costs applicable to comparable Indian-made and imported products. Where policy creates a disadvantage for domestic manufacturing, correcting it requires action by the government,” CIABC noted.

CIABC further said expecting Indian manufacturers to offset an unequal tax burden simply by reducing production costs risks squeezing the investment in maturation, technology and skilled people that premiumisation requires. The policy objective should be to encourage manufacturers to keep investing in better products while ensuring that their competitiveness is assessed under equitable conditions.

CIABC urged the Madhya Pradesh government to review the total state-level tax and regulatory burden on Indian-made spirits and Bottled-in-Origin products at comparable price points and correct any unjustified disparities. Consumers should have the opportunity to choose on quality, value and preference.

“Make in India and Atmanirbhar Viksit Bharat must translate into fair treatment for Indian manufacturing. Domestic producers generate employment, support local supply chains and build Indian brands for international markets. Indian spirits that earn recognition abroad deserve a fair opportunity to compete at home. An equitable and predictable excise framework would support this ambition while safeguarding legitimate state revenue,” it added.

Atmanirbhar Bharat must mean fair competition. Atmanirbhar Bharat cannot be limited to encouraging Indian companies to manufacture. It must also ensure that Indian products have a fair opportunity to compete in the domestic market. The Madhya Pradesh government needs to ensure that its excise policies support domestic manufacturers by rationalising regulations and establishing a level playing field. A review of BIO treatment, tax incidence, retail pricing and regulatory costs would help determine whether policy changes are necessary.

 

 

Go back to top ↑