• ABOUT ASCI
  • COMPLAINTS
  • CONSUMER
  • INDUSTRY
  • ASCI UPDATES
  • CONTACT US
Advertising with a Conscience

Select Month :

 
CCC Recommendations
 

COMPANY:"Naturoma Herbal"
PRODUCT:"Saffire Sunfree"

COMPLAINT:

"1. Saffire Sunfire SPF 30 2. Saffire Sunfire 4 in 1 Matte Look Sunblock SPF 40."

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

""The ASCI had approached the concerned Media (Ananda Bazar Patrika publications) for their assistance in providing the contact details of the advertiser, or to forward the complaint to the advertiser. However, in the absence of response from the concerned media and from the advertiser prior to the due date, the matter was examined by the CCC on the basis of the material available and an exparte decision was taken. On receiving the CCC recommendation, the advertiser replied that they had not received the ASCI’s earlier communication requesting for their comments on the complaint, and hence would require re-examination of the CCC recommendation. Subsequently, the Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat which they did not avail, but the advertiser submitted their written response. Advertiser in their response stated that Saffire Sunfree is a Registered Trademark of the advertiser and Both the products, Saffire Sunfree SPF 30 and Saffire Sunfree 4 in 1 Matte Look Sunblock SPF 40, are approved by the authority in West Bengal. As claim support data, the advertiser provided certificate of trade mark registration, a masked copy of approved formulation of products, their internal finished product specification which is applied for determination of the Sun Protection Factor (SPF) in the products. The CCC considered the supporting data furnished by the advertiser in their request for re-examination. The CCC noted that the advertiser had not provided any evidence of presence of ingredients responsible for the claimed SPF value nor did they provide any technical test reports / third party reports on the test results for the SPF factor. The CCC concluded that the claims, “SPF 30”, and “SPF 40”, were not substantiated and are misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The earlier recommendation of complaint being Upheld stands on re-examination.""

COMPANY:"Asian heart hospital"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"1. Honest opinion 2. No commission to doctors."

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"This is reflecting badly on all other practicing doctors. I wish to add as follows 1) The advertiser has mentioned that they give honest opinions, they want to say that other doctors are not honest? 2) The advertiser says no commission to doctors, which again reflects badly as if others are giving commissions These statements for advertising purpose is giving wrong reflection of all doctors’ community. Hence it is objectionable"

Recommendation: NOT UPHELD

""The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant and forwarded the details of the complaint, verbatim, to the advertiser with a request to respond to the same. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat which they did not avail, but submitted their written response. Advertiser stated in their response that the advertisement is issued to benefit the public at large and not to gain any commercial benefit out of it. The statement ""No commission to Doctor"" merely expresses the dissatisfaction and displeasure about the malpractice prevalent in the medical practice and an attempt is made to benefit the public at large. Upon viewing the Ad – hoarding, examining the complaint and the response given by the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims, “Honest opinion”, and “No commission to doctors”, were not objectionable as they were factual statements of the services being offered. These were stand alone statements for the advertised hospital and did not denigrate the Doctors community. The complaint was accordingly NOT UPHELD.""

COMPANY:"Skechers India Pvt. Ltd."
PRODUCT:"Go Walk Sport"

COMPLAINT:

"1. Introducing the all-new Go Walk Sport by Skechers 2. With 5Gen cushioning for maximum comfort 3. Skechers Performance"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"Our objections: 1. Claims 1- 3 need to be substantiated with independent reports 2. The term 5Gen cushioning needs to be substantiated with independent studies. 3. Is it something that is specific to this product? 4. The term “all-new? Needs to be supported by data from independent studies. According to us, the advertisement contravenes Chapter 1.1 and 1.5 of ASCI code. Action to be taken: We propose that the advertisement should be immediately withdrawn. Action we propose ? This advt should be immediately withdrawn"

Recommendation: NOT UPHELD

""The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant and forwarded the details of the complaint, verbatim, to the advertiser with a request to respond to the same. The advertiser was granted an extension of five days to the standard lead time of seven days to submit their reply in response to their request for extension of 10 days. The Advertiser was also offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat which they availed, and submitted their written response. Advertiser in their response stated that the GOwalk Sport product is an ""All-New"" product launched in India as recently as May 2017. The product has a unique and novel design which has been protected as a design patent in various jurisdictions around the world. Skechers' proprietary cushioning technology, i.e. 5GENTM has been provided in the GOwalk Sport product for maximum comfort. “5GENTM"" is a registered trademark of Skechers in the United States and has been advertised in Trade Marks Journal in India by the Trade Marks Registry. “Skechers Performance” is not a claim, but is merely the name of Skechers' 'Performance' division which designs the GOwalk series of products. As claim support data, the advertiser provided evidence of product launch news of May 2017, Copies of United States Design Patent for Shoe Outsole Bottom and European Union Design Soles for footwear, copy of the US trademark registration certificate, an independent laboratory test report, and a copy of ASTM D2632-01 (2014), a test method providing a procedure for testing materials exhibiting rubber properties. The claim support data submitted by the advertiser was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC examined the complaint, the print advertisement and the detailed response sent by the advertiser as well as the opinion of Technical expert presented at the meeting. The CCC observed that the advertiser has not brought out a variation to an existing product but a new product of theirs in the market which is based on their design patents and the 5Gen cushioning is their own terminology. In support of cushioning claim, the resilience measurements details were provided. `Skechers Performance’ is the name of their division within the company ‘Sketchers’. In view of these details, the CCC concluded that the claims, “Introducing the all-new Go Walk Sport by Skechers”, “With 5Gen cushioning for maximum comfort”, and “Skechers Performance”, were not objectionable. The complaint was accordingly NOT UPHELD.""

 

COMPANY:"Dainik Bhaskar Group"
PRODUCT:"Dainik Bhaskar Newspaper"

COMPLAINT:

"“I enclose herewith an ad of Divya Bhaskar, Vadodara, for marketing officer 10 and enthusiastic gents and ladies & 100, 10th pass or above, age between 18 and 30 years. My objections are as follows: 1) AD declares that Divya Bhaskar is Bharat’s No.1 and worlds fourth newspaper having maximum number of circulation and invites candidates to join their circulation department for which an opportunity is open. 2) AD specifies minimum qualifications and age of prospective candidates and offers attractive salary plus incentive. 3) Interviews are arranged from 20th to 22nd June 2017 from 12 noon to 5 pm. Candidates can contact circulation Dept., A-49, Ayarn Avenue, Near Amitnagar Circle, Kareli Baug, Vadodara. Mobile 9825701353, Email: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. 4) Incentive includes free training to selected candidates during project in sales/marketing, personality development, communication. 5) The Interview dates are between 20th to 22nd June 2017 and this Ad has been published in City Bhaskar daily dt. 24/06/2017. 6) There are no proofs, no reference to any source for declaring the company Bharat’s No. 1 and worlds fourth having maximum circulation. Company has its own way of calling it No. 1. Ad is printed on 24/06/2017 for interviews scheduled on 20th to 22nd June 2017! And this is Bharat No. 1 newspaper. Kindly look into the above objections, call for company’s reply and then decide on my complaint. Kindly keep me informed”"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant and forwarded the details of the complaint, verbatim, to the advertiser with a request to respond to the same. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser had, however, not responded to ASCI’s request despite ASCI reminder. The CCC noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the prescribed due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and upon careful consideration of the complaint, and in the absence of any comments or response from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim (in Gujarati) as translated in English, “Divya Bhaskar is Bharat’s No.1 and World’s fourth newspaper having maximum number of circulation”, was not substantiated with supporting comparative data for circulation figures, and is misleading by exaggeration. Also, the source and date of research and criteria for assessment for the claim made was not indicated in the advertisement. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1, I.2 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

COMPANY:"Vodafone India Ltd "
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"“This is about vodafone offer of rupees 446 on which they are offering 1 GB internet and 300 minutes calls free for 70 days on my number 9313318596. I spoke with the customer care executive and was reassured about the offer. I opened the Vodafone website and entered the specified amount of Rupees 446 the website took me to another page which stated that the said offer is unavailable and equivalent offer of Rupees 447 is available. I paid the amount and was shocked when I could not place the call. I called up customer care executive that I am unable to place a call, the executive told me that it was my fault that I opted for 447 offer, I asked me to look into his website and type 446 the page automatically takes you to 447 offer. This 447 offer was for 28 days and with no calls and 2 gb internet usage for 28 days. The executive Mr. satyam assured me and then I spoke with the floor manager Ms Kiran said within 24 hours my offer shall be activated. After 10 minutes I was able to make a call and I was happy that the matter was solved. When I disconnected the call I could see that they Vodafone had started deducting my amount and when I called up the customer care executive about this the executive told me that now my number does not have any offer running and the amount has been transferred after deducting applicable charges or taxes. Then I twitted them and told them that I shall file complaint with the authorities how vodafone is cheating their customer to this they wrote back that my matter is escalated and someone shall speak with me shortly and the executive did call only to tell me that they cannot do anything. The website again takes me to another page but 446 and when I look upto my offers through *121# the offer of Rs 446 is still available but again not on there website. I have captured the video and screenshot of mobile. It's actually a mixture of SMS and Internet. 1. My offer shows 446. 2. When I enter this amount it takes me to some other page which offers a plan of Rs 7. (Earlier it used to take to a page which had the amount of Rs 447. https://youtu.be/i5eMPhBCS8w This is the video that I recorded. The problem is that when I entered 446 the page automatically took me to 447, and the page states that they are showing equivalent offer, which is really misleading. 446 is for 70 days where the customer gets 300 minutes of call and 1 GB internet. The 447 plan is for 28 days where I get 2 GB of internet and no calls. My only contention was why Vodafone says it's showing equivalent offer, on this they say everything is mentioned. If that is the case why to take me to a page which shows some other offer altogether. 1. If the offer of Rs 446 was not available then why it's showing in as available offer on my mobile number. 2. Now the customer care executive says that I should have looked for amazing offer available, if that is the case then why wasn't it mentioned when I called up, and why it's not mentioned when I entered 446. Vodafone has already rectified the error in my case but the website still misguided . I have already complained about this with 1. Telecom Ministry 2. Consumer affairs ministry. 3 police complaint 4. I am sitting on demonetisation at Jantar Mantar o. 10th of July 2017. The only reason I am doing this is to save others who fall for such tricky website pages The Vodafone executives also admitted that it's misleading.”"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: NOT UPHELD

""The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant and forwarded the details of the complaint, verbatim, to the advertiser with a request to respond to the same. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat which they did not avail, but submitted their written response. The advertiser in their response stated that the complainant logged into Vodafone website and instead of going to the ‘Offers’ section to avail the offer he had mistakenly done a talk-time recharge with the said denomination in the “Recharge” Section of the website. This page is designed for the normal talk-time recharges that consumers do and not to avail the special offers like these for which there is a separate section. The CCC viewed the Ad – SMS and considered the response given by the advertiser. The CCC also viewed the video link provided by the complainant as evidence, and noticed that the said offer could not be availed by the complainant because he had attempted to avail the offer in a different section of the website. The CCC concluded that the claim offer, “446 = UNLTD call + 70GB (1GB/Day) 70D”, was available for the customer to avail by approaching the Offer section of the website. The complaint was accordingly NOT UPHELD." "

 

COMPANY:"Eastern Media Limited"
PRODUCT:"Kanak News"

COMPLAINT:

"Twitter Profile Description for the official handle of Kanak News. Kanak News has claimed that it is the Leading News Channel on its twitter profile without substantiating it with any numbers; even though it is completely false and misleading information to the digital audience"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: NOT UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant and forwarded the details of the complaint, verbatim, to the advertiser with a request to respond to the same. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser had, however, not responded to ASCI’s request. The CCC noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the prescribed due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the Twitter advertisement and did not consider the claim, “Odisha’s leading 24x7 news channel from the house of Sambad”, to be objectionable. The claim was not seen to be making a No.1 market leadership claim. The complaint was NOT UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Pratham Education "
PRODUCT:"Pratham Test Prep"

COMPLAINT:

"we feel our duty to bring to your notice that Pratham Education is claiming on its Facebook page (screenshot attached -https://www.facebook.com/pratham.leadtheway ) that 8 out of 20 toppers from IP University BBA entrance exam -2017 are Pratham Students. Surprisingly they haven't posted this success on their website http://www.prathamonline.com/, which gives scope for suspicion. Moreover, they haven't mentioned any details therein which will validate authenticity of the claim. A student/aspirant will definitely get allured and misled by such an exaggerated advertisement. Thinking from the aspirant's/reader's perspective, they will simply believe in what they are reading, and will not understand whether this is a truthful advertisement or just a promotional tactic. Social medias are very popular nowadays for promotional activities but it seems that Pratham is using this platform for posting such unsupported advertisements and misleading public at large. Shouldn't Pratham be asked to justify their claim that how these 8 toppers belong to Pratham? Since ASCI has always taken action against such misleading advertisements; we are submitting this request for your consideration and necessary action"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: NOT UPHELD

"The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant and forwarded the details of the complaint, verbatim, to the advertiser with a request to respond to the same. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat which they availed, and at which time they submitted the Enrolment details and copy of BBA results of 8 of their students. The CCC viewed the facebook advertisement and considered the supporting data given by the advertiser. The CCC concluded that the advertiser substantiated the claim of 8 students of Pratham being in IP BBA 2017 list of Toppers. The complaint was NOT UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY:"Carrier Midea India Private Limited"
PRODUCT:"Midea Water Purifiers"

COMPLAINT:

“Midea UV, with its unique cold cathode UV lamp technology, is positioned just before the faucet to ensure 100% safe water is dispensed”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"“The following claim in the Advertisements referred above are unsubstantiated as well as highly misleading to consumers. The Advertiser states “Midea UV, with its unique cold cathode UV lamp technology, is positioned just before the faucet to ensure 100% safe water is dispensed.” “100% Safe” claimed by the Advertiser is unsubstantiated and misleading. The use of the statement 100% protection implies that the water purifier has the capability of complete protection against all diseases and contamination possible in water. These are absolute and superlative claims. They should not be allowed in the absence of robust and independent data establishing the claim. It is also pertinent to state that the Advertiser themselves claim that their UV technology provides 99.9% protection against germs which is contrary to the claim of 100% safety. If the UV technology itself is not 100% safe against germs, even without considering the effectiveness of the purifier on chemical contaminants, the Advertiser would not be able to claim 100% safe water for its Products. The relevant website extract has been attached as Annexure II. I would like to draw your attention to National Water Primary Standards of the US EPA reveals that standards are based on Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) allowed in drinking water. The Maximum Contaminant Level i.e. the prescribed water standards has been defined as “The highest level of a contaminant allowed in drinking water. MCLs are set as close to MCLGs as feasible using the best available treatment technology and taking cost into consideration. MCL’s are enforceable standards.” Similarly, Maximum Contaminant Level Goals which the EPA aims to achieve is defined as “The level of contaminant in drinking water below which there is no known or expected risk to heath. MCLGs allow for a margin of safety and are non-enforceable public health goals”. Drinking water standards are determined basis various factors such as studies of possible impurities occurring in water, available technology vis-a-vis cost implications and therefore does not recommend standards to achieve 100% safety. This further establishes that any standards for drinking water, including ones prescribed by US EPA (MCLs) and other authorities are not absolute and only prescribes enforcement feasible standards with minimal health risks. The BIS standards for drinking water is lower than the standards set by EPA establishing difference in standards and level of protection across jurisdiction. Therefore even meeting safe/pure drinking water standards in a jurisdiction does not imply 100% safety against impurities and waterborne diseases. We would like to submit as Annexure III, a CDC evaluation of filtration technology on effectiveness of contaminants, clearly establishing that UV technology is not effective against chemical contaminants. The Advertiser therefore could not provide 100% safety with UV technology.”"

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant and forwarded the details of the complaint, verbatim, to the advertiser with a request to respond to the same. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat which they did not avail, but submitted their written response. The advertiser in their response stated that RO is an extremely potent water purification process which eliminates all disease causing organisms and most chemical contaminants. Midea Water Purifiers apart from UV purification technology also has 6 stage purification technique (i.e., total 7 stage purification). Therefore, the UV may in itself give 99.9% purity, but the said UV technology coupled with 6 stage filtration process and copper enriched copper tank in Midea Water Purifier has the capability as per BIS standards to make water 100% safe for human consumption and that the 100% safe claim is “relative” and cannotes in terms of “likelihood”. Advertiser further stated that the complainant in its own advertisements (various advertisements/website content/videos) uses the terms “100% safe water”, “Completely Safe water”, “Complete Safe water always” and statements like “Har boond rakhe safe aur sweet”, etc. Also, some of the major brands in India are using same or similar declarations in their advertisements. As claim support data, the advertiser provided a copy of the Guidelines issued by the Centers for Disease Control, a diagrammatical depiction of 7 stage purification of Midea water purifier, copy of the BIS Standards for Drinking Water, various advertisements of the Complainant, and other brands in India using same or similar claims in their advertisements. The claim support data submitted by the advertiser was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC examined the complaint, the print advertisement and the advertiser’s response as well as the opinion of Technical expert presented at the meeting. The CCC observed that the advertiser claims that its units are equipped with a patented cold cathode UV lamp and six different filters to ensure safe and sweet drinking water, and it has interchangeable storage tanks and they adhere to Bureau of Indian Standards (BIS) specifications, hence it can be called 100% safe. However the advertiser did not provide test reports to show compliance with BIS/IS water quality. The CCC did not agree with the advertiser’s contention that “100% safe” claim is a relative claim. Regardless of the test report, the CCC considered “100% safe” claim to be an absolute claim and unacceptable as there are many other factors that could impact safety of a product output. The CCC concluded that the claim, “Midea UV, ….to ensure 100% safe water is dispensed”, was not substantiated and is misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was accordingly UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Dr Biswaroop Roy Chowdhury (Indo Vietnam Medical Board)"
PRODUCT:"Virtual-72 Hrs Diabetes Reversal Program"

COMPLAINT:

“Yes, you can be free of 3Ds Diagnosis Drugs Diabetes ….Forever in just 3 days or precisely 72 hrs”.

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

""The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat which they did not avail nor did they have a telecon but submitted their written response. Advertiser in their response stated that they did not mean that a miracle will happen within 3 days, but that theirs is a 72 hrs Diabetes Reversal Program which is conducted for 3 days and expected outcome could be Reversal of Diabetes. As claim support data, the advertiser provided results of their 72 hrs Diabetes reversal program compiled in a book titled ""Diabetes Educators' Success Stories"", testimonials published in the book ""Diabetes Educators' Success Stories"", and Books 'Diabetes Type 1& 2 Cure in 72 hrs"" and ""Last Days of Diabetes'. Subsequently, the advertiser informed that they have revised the Ad – mailer, and submitted a revised copy of the same. Upon viewing the Ad – mailer complained against, examining the complaint, and the response given by the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “Yes, you can be free of 3Ds - Diagnosis Drugs Diabetes ….Forever in just 3 days or precisely 72 hrs”, was not substantiated with clinical evidence among statistically significant and representative sample size, and is misleading by gross exaggeration. Furthermore, the claim implies complete cure for Diabetes which is in Breach of the law as it violated The Drugs & Magic Remedies Act (item 9 under DMR schedule). The Ad – mailer contravened Chapters I.1, I.4 and III.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was accordingly UPHELD." "

 

COMPANY:"34 Heart Care"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"1. Before and after visuals are misleading 2. Testimonials in the ad appears to be misleading."

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

""The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objections raised in the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat which they did not avail but submitted their written response. Advertiser in their response suggests that ASCI should do research on EECP/ECP and Chelation therapy with reference to FDA, USA and AHA (American Heart Association, USA) approvals respectively, which will prove that the advertiser’s claims made are acceptable and medically proven. Advertiser did not provide any supporting data for the claims made by them and more specifically regarding the testimonials referred to in the advertisement. Upon examining the advertisement, the complaint, and the response given by the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the testimonial claims related to heart treatment were not substantiated with any clinical evidence, and are misleading by gross exaggeration. Furthermore, efficacy being depicted via images of before and after the treatment are misleading. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was accordingly UPHELD.""

 

COMPANY:"Airwin Academy"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“100% record placement in 2016.”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

""The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat which they did not avail, but replied requesting for an extension to submit their response and also for a telephonic conversation with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser was granted an extension of four days to the standard lead time of seven days to submit their reply in response to their request for extension of one week. Further they were also offered an opportunity for a telecon with the ASCI Secretariat, which they did not avail. The advertiser did not respond by the extended due date. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and upon careful consideration of the complaint, and in the absence of specific comments from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “100% record placement in 2016”, was not substantiated with authentic supporting data such as detailed list of students who have been placed through their Institute, enrolment forms and appointment letters received by the students, nor any independent audit or verification certificate. The claim is also misleading by exaggeration. The print advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was accordingly UPHELD.""

 

COMPANY:"IBA (Indus Business Academy)"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“Best Education Brand 2017 Award by Economic Times.”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

""The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat which they did not avail, but submitted their written response. The advertiser had stated in their response that the award was given by Economic times in February 2017. As claim support data, the advertiser provided a copy of the certificate and photos of the award, Participation Options - The ET Best Education Brands 2017, and copy of email received by them from Economic Times. The CCC viewed the print advertisement, examined the complaint and the response given by the advertiser. The CCC observed that the email of Economic Times states that Indus Business Academy has been recognized as one of “The Economic Times Best Education Brands 2017”. Based on this data, the CCC concluded that the claim, “Best Education Brand 2017 Award by Economic Times”, is misleading by ambiguity and omission of the reference that it is one of many brands recognized by the Economic Times. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapter I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.""

 

COMPANY:"Dhanwantari institute & Placement"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“100% Job”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

""The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat which they did not avail. On the advertiser’s request, they were provided with an opportunity to discuss their submission via telecon. Subsequently, the advertiser replied stating that they would be modifying the claim, “100% Job” to “100% Job Assistance”. Upon viewing the print advertisement, examining the complaint and the reply received from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim “100% Job”, was not substantiated with any evidence such as detailed list of students who have been placed through their Institute, nor any independent audit or verification certificate, and the claim is misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was accordingly UPHELD.""

 

COMPANY:"Alhind Group - Alhind Academy"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"1. 2017 Premier Circle Member one & only academy in India. 2. No.1 institute in travel & tourism 3. IATA No.1 aviation institute in India"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

""The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objections raised in the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat which they did not avail, but submitted their written response. The advertiser had stated in their response that every year IATA recognises ten best institutes in the world and publishes its premier circle of these top 10 institutes which is advertised all over the world. The advertiser’s institute is the only institute in India to be selected in the premier circle in year 2017. In support of this response, the advertiser provided a copy of IATA press release wherein the advertiser’s institute features in the list of 2017 premier circle winners. Upon viewing the print advertisement, examining the complaint and the response given by the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “2017 Premier Circle Member one & only academy in India”, was substantiated. The claim, “IATA No.1 aviation institute in India”, was not considered to be objectionable. These complaints were NOT UPHELD. The claim, “No.1 institute in travel & tourism”, was not substantiated with any verifiable comparative data of the advertiser’s institute and other similar institutes in the same category, or through a third party validation. The claim was misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement was therefore considered as contravening the Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. This complaint was UPHELD.""

 

COMPANY:"Bansal Learning Private Limited- Bansal IIT/JEE Medical Foundation"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“100% Scholarship”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser had, however, not responded to ASCI’s request. The CCC noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the prescribed due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and upon careful consideration of the complaint, and in the absence of any comments or response from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “100% Scholarship”, was not substantiated with supporting evidence of 100% scholarships availed by any of their students, and was misleading by ambiguity regarding the amount of scholarship and the total number of scholarships being offered. The advertisement was therefore considered as contravening the Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was accordingly UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Murugesan Institute of Technology-Polytechnic - Murugesan Polytechnic Clg"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“State level first college to offer jobs in multinational companies for 3722 people in the last 3 years alone”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

""The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat which they did not avail but replied that they are willing to avail informal resolution of the complaint. On the advertiser’s request, they were provided with an opportunity to discuss their submission via telecon. Subsequently, the advertiser responded stating that the responsibility of the institution does not only end with providing diploma education to their students but also extends to fetch their students a reasonably good job. During the period 2009 - 2010, their institute touched a maximum of around 1300 students. They consider that if one student got selected in three different companies, it amounts to 3 placements. As claim support data, the advertiser provided Placement orders given by the companies though their college, Certificate of Registration, MoU with Binary University of Malaysia for higher continuing education of their students, and the list of companies that visited their institution and number of students recruited by them year wise. Upon carefully viewing the print advertisement, examining the complaint and the response received from the advertiser, the CCC noted that the advertiser only asserts that their college is the first to offer jobs in multinational companies. No data was submitted by the advertiser in support of the claim and the CCC did not agree with the advertiser’s contention that one student getting three offers should be considered as three placements. The CCC concluded that the claim, “State level first college to offer jobs in multinational companies for 3722 people in the last 3 years alone”, was inadequately substantiated and is misleading by ambiguity and exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was accordingly UPHELD.""

 

COMPANY:"Talent Technology Pvt. Ltd"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“100% placement assistance”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser had, however, not responded to ASCI’s request. The CCC noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the prescribed due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and upon careful consideration of the complaint, and in the absence of any comments or response from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the use of 100% numerical is not relevant for “placement assistance” claim. The use of “100%” as a descriptor in the claim is misleading by implication. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapter I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was accordingly UPHELD."

 
 

COMPANY:"Career Point University Kota"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“100% placement assistance”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser had, however, not responded to ASCI’s request. The CCC noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the prescribed due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and upon careful consideration of the complaint, and in the absence of any comments or response from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the use of 100% numerical is not relevant for “placement assistance” claim. The use of “100%” as a descriptor in the claim is misleading by implication. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapter I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was accordingly UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Jhunjhunu Defence Academy"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“Guarantee of 100% fees return on stamp paper”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser had, however, not responded to ASCI’s request. The CCC noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the prescribed due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and upon careful consideration of the complaint, and in the absence of any comments or response from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “Guarantee of 100% fees return on stamp paper”, was not substantiated with any supporting evidence of the students who were refunded with the fees back, and is misleading by gross exaggeration. The advertisement contravened of the Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was accordingly UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Chellammal Educational Trust- Lourdes Mount College of Engineering & Technology"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“100% job opportunity”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser had, however, not responded to ASCI’s request. The CCC noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the prescribed due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and upon careful consideration of the complaint, and in the absence of any comments or response from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “100% Job Opportunity” was not substantiated with data to show the job offers/opportunity provided to their students. The CCC considered the use of “100%” to be misleading by ambiguity and implication. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was accordingly UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "AJK College Of Arts And Science"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“100% placement assistance”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser had, however, not responded to ASCI’s request. The CCC noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the prescribed due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and upon careful consideration of the complaint, and in the absence of any comments or response from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the use of 100% numerical is not relevant for “placement assistance” claim. The use of “100%” as a descriptor in the claim is misleading by implication. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapter I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was accordingly UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Kumaran Nursing School"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“100% Job Opportunity”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser had, however, not responded to ASCI’s request. The CCC noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the prescribed due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and upon careful consideration of the complaint, and in the absence of any comments or response from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “100% Job Opportunity” was not substantiated with data to show the job offers/opportunity provided to their students. The CCC considered the use of “100%” to be misleading by ambiguity and implication. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was accordingly UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Qi Lifecare Pvt. Ltd."
PRODUCT:"Qi Spine Clinic"

COMPLAINT:

"1. New isolation treatment for severe back pain which have helped 67-year-old avoid 2nd spine surgery. 2. Testimonial appears to be misleading as there is no disclaimer to specify conditions applicable"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

""The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objections raised in the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat which they did not avail, but submitted their written response. Advertiser in their response stated that the advertorial mentions the isolation technology which is the heart of their treatment methodology. The targeting of tissue by isolation means an earlier reversal of symptoms. They use David Spine Concept System for isolation technique - it is a set of devices equipped with a knee-lock system and a thigh restraining belt to immobilize both hips and thighs which allow the patient to move only the lower back. The program is aimed to increase both strength and endurance of the back/paraspinal muscle with 15 to 20 repetitions every session on the device. As claim support data, the advertiser provided article references on effectiveness of device-based therapy for conservative management of low back pain, and simple ways to alleviate back pain, and articles in California press mentioning their research. Upon examining the complaint, the advertorial, and the response given by the advertiser, the CCC observed that the data provided was not from published medical journals. Advertiser did not provide any clinical evidence of the benefit of their isolation technology treatment and only made assertions that they do give faster recovery. The CCC concluded that the claim, “New isolation treatment for severe back pain which have helped 67-year-old avoid 2nd spine surgery”, was not substantiated with treatment efficacy data among statistically significant sample size, and is misleading by gross exaggeration. Furthermore, support data based on the testimonial of one patient claiming the benefit of the treatment, was not considered to be representative of a large population and hence not adequate, and was misleading by omission of specific conditions that are applicable. The advertorial contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was accordingly UPHELD.""

 

COMPANY: "Dr. Richa’s Unique Clinic"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“India's Best Doctors International Health Award”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

""The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat which they did not avail, but submitted their written response. As claim support data, the advertiser provided details of the doctor’s qualifications and some “healthcare excellence awards” received by them. However, the CCC did not consider them to be relevant as a claim support for claiming to be “India's Best Doctors International Health Award”. ASCI requested the advertiser for data specific to the claim however, the Advertiser did not provide this information or a copy of this particular award/certificate as claimed in the advertisement . Upon viewing the print advertisement, examining the complaint and the response given by the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “India's Best Doctors International Health Award”, was not substantiated and the claim is misleading by exaggeration. Also, the advertiser did not provide a copy of this particular award/certificate as claimed in the advertisement. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was accordingly UPHELD.""

 

COMPANY: "SBS Biotech (Unit-II) Ayurvedic Division"
PRODUCT:"PetSaffa"

COMPLAINT:

"1. Gas, constipation, acidity? Pet Safa 2. Natural laxative granules 3. Effect from first day 4. Non habit forming 5. Stomach clean then all diseases go away"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"1. Claims 1-5 should be substantiated with independent research data and certified by competent authority. 2. Has the product been approved by any National/International Regulatory Authority? 3. Have the results been confirmed by an Independent Agency? 4. How long does the effect lasts? What conditions are required for this? 5. Is the treatment safe for all patients? Does one require to take it under doctors supervision? 6. How long can one take this product? 7. What happens when one stops using this product? According to us, the advertisement contravenes Chapter 1.1 and 1.4 of ASCI code Action to be taken: We propose that the advertisement should be immediately withdrawn.”"

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant and forwarded the details of the complaint, verbatim, to the advertiser with a request to respond to the same. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat which they did not avail, but submitted their written response post the due date. The advertiser had stated in their response that the product formulation contains 11 time-tested herbs whose significant properties are well-mentioned in standardized books like Ayurvedic pharmacopoeia of India, Charakasamhita and Bhavaparkasha. This Ayurvedic proprietary medicine is helpful in Constipation, Gas and Acidity and can be used by patients of all ages (except small children and pregnant ladies). As claim support data, the advertiser provided report of test and analysis, Copies of Product Approval License, and copy of product packaging. The claim support data submitted by the advertiser was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC examined the complaint, the print advertisement, and the detailed response sent by the advertiser as well as the opinion of Technical expert presented at the meeting. The CCC observed that the product is a licensed Ayurvedic product with specific claims permitted based on Ayurvedic and known attributes of the ingredients. However, the CCC concluded that the claim, “Not Habit forming” was not substantiated as the ingredient in the product - Senna is habit forming. This claim is misleading. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. This complaint was accordingly UPHELD. In the context of an advertisement for a product meant to relieve Constipation and with data submitted by the advertiser, the claims, “Gas, constipation, acidity? Pet Safa”, “Natural laxative granules”, “Effect from first day”, and “pet saffa to har rog daffa”, were not considered to be objectionable. This complaint was NOT UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "SBS Biotech (Unit-II) Ayurvedic Division"
PRODUCT:"PetSaffa"

COMPLAINT:

"1. No more pressure, take Pet Safa daily 2. So get pet safa ayurvedic granules and tablets today itself which is easy to take, shows results from first day and it is non-habit forming 3. Constipation, gas, acidity 4. Natural laxative granules and tablets 5. 100% ayurvedic 6. No 1 Brand India 2016 7. Features Raju Shrivastav"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"1. Claims 1-5 should be substantiated with independent research data and certified by competent authority. 2. Please substantiate the “No 1 Brand India 2016? with details on the award, date received etc. 3. Has the product been approved by any National/International Regulatory Authority? 4. Have the results been confirmed by an Independent Agency? 5. How long does the effect lasts? What conditions are required for this? 6. Is the treatment safe for all patients? Does one require to take it under doctor’s supervision? 7. How long can one take this product? 8.What happens when one stops using this product? 9. Claim 1 says “take Pet Safa daily? while claim 2 mention “non habit forming?. Both are contradictory statements. Please explain. 10. As per the ASCI Guidelines for Celebrities in Advertising, a Celebrity should do due diligence to ensure that all description, claims and comparisons made in the advertisements they appear in or endorse are capable of being objectively ascertained and capable of substantiation and should not mislead or appear deceptive. The claims made by the celebrity (Raju Shrivastav) in this advt violate this clause of the ASCI guidelines. According to us, the advertisement contravenes Chapter 1.1 and 1.4 of ASCI code Action to be taken: We propose that the advertisement should be immediately withdrawn.”"

Recommendation: UPHELD

""The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant and forwarded the details of the complaint, verbatim, to the advertiser with a request to respond to the same. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat which they did not avail, but submitted their written response on receiving the ASCI reminder. The advertiser had stated in their response that the product formulation contains 11 time-tested herbs whose significant properties are well-mentioned in standardized books like Ayurvedic pharmacopoeia of India, Charakasamhita and Bhavaparkasha. This Ayurvedic proprietary medicine is helpful in Constipation, Gas and Acidity and can be used by patients of all ages (except small children and pregnant ladies). As claim support data, the advertiser provided report of test and analysis, Copies of Product Approval License, and copy of the award certificate. The claim support data submitted by the advertiser was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC examined the complaint, the print advertisement, and the detailed response sent by the advertiser as well as the opinion of Technical expert presented at the meeting. The CCC observed that the product is a licensed Ayurvedic product with specific claims permitted based on Ayurvedic and known attributes of the ingredients. However, the CCC concluded that the claim, “Not Habit forming” was not substantiated as the ingredient in the product - Senna is habit forming. This claim is misleading. Regarding the No. 1 Brand claim, the CCC noted that the copy of the award certificate mentions that the product is No.1 Brand in India’s “Best Digestive Medicine” category. The claim, “No 1 Brand India 2016”, was therefore considered to be misleading by omission of mention of the category. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. These complaints were accordingly UPHELD. In the context of an advertisement for a product meant to relieve constipation and with data submitted by the advertiser, the claims, “No more pressure, take Pet Safa daily”, “So get pet safa ayurvedic granules and tablets today itself which is easy to take, shows results from first day”, “Constipation, gas, acidity”, “Natural laxative granules and tablets”, and “100% Ayurvedic”, were not considered to be objectionable. This complaint was NOT UPHELD. The complaint regarding endorsement by the Celebrity was examined by the CCC. It was seen that the advertisement shows photograph of Raju Shrivastava, a comedian who was not considered to be a “famous and well-known” person likely to have a huge influence on public for product purchase decision. This complaint was NOT UPHELD.""

 

COMPANY: "SBS Biotech (Unit-II) Ayurvedic Division"
PRODUCT:"PetSaffa"

COMPLAINT:

"1. Divisa herbal care presents pet safa ayurvedic granules and tablets which is easy to take and shows results from first day. 2. Constipation, gas, acidity 3. When stomach problems trouble you, pet safa is the solution 4. Natural laxative granules and tablets 5. 100% ayurvedic 6. No side effects 7. Stomach clean then all diseases go away 8. Features Raju Shrivastav"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"1. Claims 1-7 should be substantiated with independent research data and certified by competent authority. 2. Has the product been approved by any National/International Regulatory Authority? 3. Have the results been confirmed by an Independent Agency? 4. How long does the effect lasts? What conditions are required for this? 5. Is the treatment safe for all patients? Does one require to take it under doctor’s supervision? 6. How long can one take this product? 7. What happens when one stops using this product? 8. As per the ASCI Guidelines for Celebrities in Advertising, a Celebrity should do due diligence to ensure that all description, claims and comparisons made in the advertisements they appear in or endorse are capable of being objectively ascertained and capable of substantiation and should not mislead or appear deceptive. The claims made by the celebrity (Raju Shrivastav) in this advt violate this clause of the ASCI guidelines. According to us, the advertisement contravenes Chapter 1.1 and 1.4 of ASCI code Action to be taken: We propose that the advertisement should be immediately withdrawn."

Recommendation: UPHELD

""The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant and forwarded the details of the complaint, verbatim, to the advertiser with a request to respond to the same. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat which they did not avail, but submitted their written response. The advertiser had stated in their response that the product formulation contains 11 time-tested herbs whose significant properties are well-mentioned in standardized books like Ayurvedic pharmacopoeia of India, Charakasamhita and Bhavaparkasha. This Ayurvedic proprietary medicine is helpful in Constipation, Gas and Acidity and can be used by patients of all ages (except small children and pregnant ladies). As claim support data, the advertiser provided report of test and analysis, and Copies of Product Approval License. The claim support data submitted by the advertiser was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC examined the complaint, the print advertisement, and the detailed response sent by the advertiser as well as the opinion of Technical expert presented at the meeting. The CCC observed that the product is a licensed Ayurvedic product with specific claims permitted based on Ayurvedic and known attributes of the ingredients. The CCC noted that for complaints 1707-C. 700 and 1707-C.701, the claim, “Not Habit forming” was not substantiated as the ingredient in the product - Senna is habit forming. In view of this observation, the claim “No side effects” in the present complaint was not substantiated and this claim is misleading by exaggeration. This complaint was UPHELD. In the context of an advertisement for a product meant to relieve constipation and with data submitted by the advertiser, the claims, “Divisa herbal care presents pet safa ayurvedic granules and tablets which is easy to take and shows results from first day”, “Constipation, gas, acidity”, “When stomach problems trouble you, pet safa is the solution”, “Natural laxative granules and tablets”, “100% Ayurvedic”, “No side effects”, and “pet saffa to har rog daffa”, were not considered to be objectionable. This complaint was NOT UPHELD. The complaint regarding endorsement by the Celebrity was examined by the CCC. It was seen that the advertisement shows photograph of Raju Shrivastava, who was not considered to be a “famous and well-known” person likely to have a huge influence on public for product purchase decision. This complaint was NOT UPHELD.""

 

COMPANY:"Surya Amrit Jivan "
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"1.Increase Sexual Intercourse time upto 50 mins 2.The sureshot ayurvedic medicine to increase length and thickness of organ, sloppy organ, thinness, loose organ. 3 The visual in the ad read in conjunction with the claims objected to implies that the treatment is meant for enhancement of sexual pleasure"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"Improvement in size and shape of the sexual organ and in duration of sexual performance. Item no. 30- Schedule J Maintenance or improvement of the capacity of the human being for sexual pleasure – Item no. 36 – Schedule J"

 

COMPANY:"Ganga Ayurvedic Clinic"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"1. Increase hold back time upto 40 minutes. 2. Ayurvedic sure shot treatment for increasing length and thickness of organ, discharge, nightfall, thin sperm, loose and sloppy organ. 3.The visual in the ad read in conjunction with the claims objected to implies that the treatment is meant for enhancement of sexual pleasure."

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

""Improvement in size and shape of the sexual organ and in duration of sexual performance. Item no. 30- Schedule J Maintenance or improvement of the capacity of the human being for sexual pleasure – Item no. 36 – Schedule J""

 

COMPANY:"Pushpa Clinic"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"1.Treatment of baldness with challenge. 2. 100% Money Back Guarantee If no result within 15-60 days. 3. Only Medicine 4. The visual in the Ad implies cure for Baldness."

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

""Baldness Item no. 5- Schedule J""

 

COMPANY:"Baba Haridas Ayurveda"
PRODUCT:"Night Gold Tablets"

COMPLAINT:

"1. A complete solution to sex problems. 2. The visual on the product packaging read in conjunction with the claim objected to implies that the product is meant for enhancement of sexual pleasure 3. The advertisement provides link to website which refers to “This 100% natural sex enhancer is one of a kind in its extraordinary effectiveness. It helps to increase one’s libido (sexual desire) and works as a powerful stimulant for both sexes.”"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

""Maintenance or improvement of the capacity of the human being for sexual pleasure – Item no. 36 – Schedule J""

 

COMPANY:"Sri Karpagam Herbals"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"1. Spondylitis cures in 48 days. 2. Nervous Disorders will be cured for sure."

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

""Spondylitis Item No. 48- Schedule J Disorders of the nervous system Item No. 14-DMR Schedule""

 

COMPANY:"Gaharwar Pharma Products Pvt. Ltd"
PRODUCT:"P.V. Tone Oil and Capsule"

COMPLAINT:

"The visual in the Ad implies that the product is meant for enhancement of sexual pleasure"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

""Maintenance or improvement of the capacity of the human being for sexual pleasure – Item no. 36 – Schedule J""

 

COMPANY: "Dindayal Industries Limited"
PRODUCT:"303 Capsule"

COMPLAINT:

"1. Bring Energy and Passion in your married life. 2.Fulfill the expectations of your life partner. 3.For MEN only. 4. The visual in the ad read in conjunction with the claims objected to implies that the product is meant for enhancement of sexual pleasure."

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

""Maintenance or improvement of the capacity of the human being for sexual pleasure – Item no. 36 – Schedule J""

 

COMPANY:"Dindayal Industries Limited"
PRODUCT:"303 Gold Power Oil"

COMPLAINT:

"1. 303 Gold Power Oil helps is activating idle nerves. 2. The visual in the ad and product packaging read in conjunction with the claim objected to implies that the product is meant for enhancement of sexual pleasure."

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

""Maintenance or improvement of the capacity of the human being for sexual pleasure – Item no. 36 – Schedule J""

 

COMPANY:"Apna Ayurveda"
PRODUCT:"Apna Ayurveda Products"

COMPLAINT:

"1. Lack of Passion 2. Premature Ejaculation 3. Small Organ 4. Loose Organ 5. Laxity 6.One Step towards Satisfaction"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

""Premature Ejaculation Item no- 47- Schedule J Maintenance or improvement of the capacity of the human being for sexual pleasure – Item no. 36 – Schedule J""

 

COMPANY: "Rajnish Hot Deals Pvt. Ltd "
PRODUCT:"Kasaav Dusting Powder"

COMPLAINT:

"1. Solving problems of loosely shrinkage of genitals and helps strengthen those genitals helps strengthen those genitals muscles which tightness it and makes every woman feel energetic and younger. 2. With 15 days of Kasaav powder relieve the old memories with new confidence and exaltation."

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

""Maintenance or improvement of the capacity of the human being for sexual pleasure – Item no. 36 – Schedule J""

 

COMPANY: "Chaturbhuj Pharmaceutical Company"
PRODUCT:"Japani Oil"

COMPLAINT:

"1.Experience energy, power and Strength. 2. Famous and effective for strength in men. 3. The visual in the ad and the product packaging read in conjunction with the claim objected to implies that the product is meant for enhancement of sexual pleasure."

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

""Maintenance or improvement of the capacity of the human being for sexual pleasure – Item no. 36 – Schedule J""

 

COMPANY: "Rajnish Hot Deals Pvt. Ltd"
PRODUCT:"Playwin Plus Capsule"

COMPLAINT:

"1. 1 Capsule 1 hour before 2. Get powerful strength in every moment 3. The visual in the ad and product packaging read in conjunction with the claims objected to implies that the product is meant for enhancement of sexual pleasure."

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

""Maintenance or improvement of the capacity of the human being for sexual pleasure – Item no. 36 – Schedule J""

 

COMPANY:"Rajnish Hot Deals Pvt. Ltd"
PRODUCT:"Playwin Capsule"

COMPLAINT:

"1. This storm of immense passion will make your partner enjoyable. 2. The unique experience of strength and happiness that will make your married life special. 3. Your passion and their love will bring pleasure in married life 4. Massage on weak nerves with few drops of Play Win Oil, it will strengthen the vital organs of the body. 5. Experience the unique joy of your married life. 6.The visual in the ad and on the product packaging , read in conjunction with the claims objected to implies that the product is meant for enhancement of sexual pleasure."

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

""Maintenance or improvement of the capacity of the human being for sexual pleasure – Item no. 36 – Schedule J""

 

COMPANY:"Rajnish Hot Deals Pvt. Ltd"
PRODUCT:"Play Win Oil and Capsule"

COMPLAINT:

"1.That Passion which makes your partner more excited. 2.Gain your power, stamina , strength. 3. By massage on weak nerves with few drops of Play Win Oil , it will strengthen the vital organs of the body. This will ensure happy and satisfied married life. 4. Growth of power, extra timing and strength. 5. Without interruption take abundant pleasure in married life. 6. Get joy in married life with more passion. 7.The visual in the ad and on product packaging read in conjunction with the claims objected to implied that the product is meant for the enhancement of sexual pleasure. 8. The advertisement provides link to website ( http://playwincapsule.com/playwin-oil.html ; http://playwincapsule.com/playwin-capsule.html ) which refers to “Moreover, Playwin Oil helps to keep the penis erected for a comparatively longer time period as well as controls the problem of pre-mature ejaculation”,”Playwin Capsule works instantly that means – in minutes after consuming, you can start enjoying truly mind blowing sex.”"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

""Maintenance or improvement of the capacity of the human being for sexual pleasure – Item no. 36 – Schedule J Premature Ejaculation - Item no- 47- Schedule J""

 

COMPANY:"Shree Maruti Herbal"
PRODUCT:"Stay-On Power Oil"

COMPLAINT:

"1.Reach new heights of joy. 2. Only for men. 3. Increases the energy and enthusiasm. 4. The visual in the ad and on the product packaging implies that the product is meant for enhancement of sexual pleasure. 5.The advertisement provides link to website ( https://www.stayonpowercapsule.com/stay-on-power-oil-30-ml.html) which refers to “Massage 5-6 drops of oil everyday on the male organ for enhanced blood flow & erection. This Oil is a combination of 9-herbs and is intended as an external massage oil to improve blood flow and provide better erections.”"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

""Maintenance or improvement of the capacity of the human being for sexual pleasure – Item no. 36 – Schedule J""

 

COMPANY:"Shree Maruti Herbal"
PRODUCT:"Stay-On Capsule and Oil"

COMPLAINT:

"1. For Excitement , vigour and strength. 2. You will get a feeling of youthfulness, resistance power, pep, excitement , strength and vigour in your body. 3. The visual in the ad and product packaging read in conjunction with the claims objected to implies that the products are meant for the enhancement of sexual pleasure. 4.The advertisement provides link to website ( https://www.stayonpowercapsule.com/stay-on-power-capsule.html ; https://www.stayonpowercapsule.com/stay-on-power-oil-30-ml.html)which refers to” Stay-On Capsules are a miracle of Ayurveda, and while these are very effective for ensuring sexual well being and letting you get over sexual dysfunctions”, “Massage 5-6 drops of oil everyday on the male organ for enhanced blood flow & erection.”"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

""Maintenance or improvement of the capacity of the human being for sexual pleasure – Item no. 36 – Schedule J""

 

COMPANY:"Shree Maruti Herbal"
PRODUCT: "Stay-On Oral Liquid"

COMPLAINT:

"1.Starts work in 30 minutes. 2. The visual in the ad read in conjunction with the claim objected to implies that the product is meant for enhancement of sexual pleasure. 3. The advertisement provides link to website(https://www.stayonpowercapsule.com/stay-on-oral-liquid.html) which refers to “Use the Stay-On Oral Liquid to get over any of the problems like erectile dysfunction or premature ejaculation which may be bothering you, this instantly makes you feel energetic and full of vigor and vitality.”"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

"Maintenance or improvement of the capacity of the human being for sexual pleasure – Item no. 36 – Schedule J Premature Ejaculation - Item no- 47- Schedule J"

 

COMPANY:"Madras Institute of Hotel Management and Catering Technology"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“100% assured jobs in India & abroad”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser had, however, not responded to ASCI’s request. The CCC noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the prescribed due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and upon careful consideration of the complaint, and in the absence of any comments or response from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim in the Ad, “100% assured jobs in India & abroad”, was not substantiated and is misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapter I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"IIPHS College of Fire and Safety Management"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“India's 1st safety college”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser had, however, not responded to ASCI’s request. The CCC noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the prescribed due date for this complaint. Advertiser did not provide proof of their institute being the first safety college than other similar institutes in the same category. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and upon careful consideration of the complaint, and in the absence of any comments or response from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “India's 1st safety college”, was not substantiated with any verifiable comparative data of the advertiser’s institute and other similar institutes, or any third party validation to prove this claim. Also, the claim is misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement was therefore considered as contravening the Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was accordingly UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"KiiT Group of Institution"
PRODUCT:"KiiT International School"

COMPLAINT:

“Excellent placement in top Universities of the World.”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser had, however, not responded to ASCI’s request. The CCC noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the prescribed due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and upon careful consideration of the complaint, and in the absence of any comments or response from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “Excellent placement in top Universities of the World”, was not substantiated with authentic supporting data such as detailed list of students who have been placed through their Institute, contact details of students for verification, names of the universities and evidence to support placements of their students in them. Also, the claim is misleading by exaggeration. The print advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was accordingly UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"NIMS International Institute of Hotel Management"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“100% Job”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser had, however, not responded to ASCI’s request. The CCC noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the prescribed due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and upon careful consideration of the complaint, and in the absence of any comments or response from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “100% job”, was not substantiated with any evidence such as detailed list of students who have been placed through their Institute, their enrolment forms and appointment letters received by the students, nor any independent audit or verification certificate, and the claim is misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was accordingly UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Tirunelveli IIPE "
PRODUCT: "DON NEET-JEE School "

COMPLAINT:

“If you can’t clear NEET, get 100% course fee back”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser had, however, not responded to ASCI’s request. The CCC noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the prescribed due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and upon careful consideration of the complaint, and in the absence of any comments or response from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “If you can’t clear NEET, get 100% course fee back”, was not substantiated with any supporting evidence of the students who were refunded with the fees back, and is misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was accordingly UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Chennais Amirta International Institute of Hotel Management"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“100% Job”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser had, however, not responded to ASCI’s request. The CCC noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the prescribed due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and upon careful consideration of the complaint, and in the absence of any comments or response from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “100% job”, was not substantiated with any evidence such as detailed list of students who have been placed through their Institute, their enrolment forms and appointment letters received by the students, nor any independent audit or verification certificate, and the claim is misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was accordingly UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Chennais Amirta International Institute of Hotel Management"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“100% Placement.”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser had, however, not responded to ASCI’s request. The CCC noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the prescribed due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and upon careful consideration of the complaint, and in the absence of any comments or response from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “100% Placement”, was not substantiated with authentic supporting data such as detailed list of students who have been placed through their Institute, contact details of students for verification, enrolment forms and appointment letters received by the students, nor any independent audit or verification certificate. Also, the claim is misleading by exaggeration. The print advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was accordingly UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Punarnava Ayurvedic"
PRODUCT:"Thyrodon Ghan"

COMPLAINT:

"1. “10 times more powerful concentrated juice” 2. “That gives you immediate relief from the different diseases of Thyroid.”"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objections raised in the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser had, however, not responded to ASCI’s request. The CCC noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the prescribed due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and upon careful consideration of the complaint, and in the absence of any comments or response from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims, “10 times more powerful concentrated juice”, and “That gives you immediate relief from the different diseases of Thyroid”, were not substantiated with evidence of product efficacy and are misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was accordingly UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "The Bombay Burmah Trading Corporation Limited"
PRODUCT:"Oothu Green Tea"

COMPLAINT:

"1) Helps to reduce the effects of carcinogens, to maintain cholesterol at healthy levels, to manage blood sugar and blood pressure levels. 2) Claims to reduce the effects of toxins on liver."

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

""The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objections raised in the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat which they availed. They were also provided with an opportunity to discuss their submission via telecon. Advertiser in their response sought for Informal Resolution of the complaint, however, they did not complete the formalities prior to the due date for the same. Subsequently, the advertiser provided copy of FSSAI license, copy of the product label, and a journal reference on health benefits of green tea. The claim support data submitted by the advertiser was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC carefully examined the complaint, the print advertisement and the supporting data given by the advertiser as well as the opinion of Technical expert presented at the meeting. The CCC observed that the content of research paper on Anti-carcinogenic property and Epidemiological evidence from population studies does not support the claim that green tea reduces the effect of carcinogens. There are numerous carcinogens in the environment and the claim ‘reduce the effect of carcinogens’ is generalized and cannot include all carcinogens. The statement that emerging animal and clinical studies are beginning to suggest that EGCG may plan an important role in the prevention of cancer does not indicate that green tea reduces the effect of carcinogens. It refers to the role of EGCG which is an active ingredient in green tea and therefore the amount of EGCG consumed assumes importance than green tea, the amount of EGCG present in one cup of green tea and how many cups need to be consumed needs to be ascertained before establishing a direct cause and effect relationship. The CCC further observed that the content from the research paper on Green Tea & Cardiovascular Disease and Cholesterol reduction does not support the claim ‘Maintain cholesterol at healthy levels’. The content from the research paper on Weight management does not support the claim ‘Manage body weight’. The evidence: Researchers found that men who were given a combination of caffeine and green tea extract burned more calories than those given only caffeine or a placebo cannot support the claim for green tea. This is because the concentration of the active ingredient in an extract would definitely be more than that found in green tea and therefore the evidence cannot be extrapolated to green tea. The evidence: with the consumption of green tea diet the body’s total 24-hour energy expenditure is increased by up to 4% - This is roughly equivalent to losing more than 10 pounds of weight a month does not indicate that there is actual weight loss. The content from the research paper on Diabetes does not support the claim, ‘Manage blood sugar levels’. Based on this data, the CCC concluded that the claims, “Helps to reduce the effects of carcinogens, to maintain cholesterol at healthy levels, to manage blood sugar and blood pressure levels”, and “reduce the effects of toxins on liver”, were inadequately substantiated with evidence of product efficacy, and are misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.""

 

COMPANY:"Trophic Wellness Pvt Ltd."
PRODUCT:"Nutricharge S & F"

COMPLAINT:

"1. Clinically proven to reduce fat and central obesity in men and women 2. Can reduce up to 11 kg of body weight and up to 4 inch waist size in 3 months 3. The client review shows a 32 year old man exercising in a gym saying that due to his overweight he was not getting married and his doctor told him that he is at the risk of having diabetes, blood pressure and heart ailments. After searching a lot on internet he found out Nutricharge S&F and started taking it. He has reduced over 7kgs in 3 months and plans continue Nutricharge S&F for 3 months more. 4. Who can consume: Anyone of age 12 years and above 5. Dosage: Replace your dinner with one sachet of Nutricharge S&F in a glass of skimmed milk. For best result follow a healthy diet of 1500 calories per day and do regular exercise. Walk daily for a minimum of 6000 steps and climb at least 250 steps every day. 6. The product is endorsed by Amitabh Bachchan and Sania Mirza"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"Our objections: 1. How does Nutricharge S&F claim to reduce fat and central obesity in men and women? Please substantiate with independent studies which have proven the safety and efficacy of the product. 2. Can the aged or people with medical conditions like diabetes, blood pressure or heart conditions consume this? Does one need to consult a doctor before consuming Nutricharge S&F? 3. Are there any side effects of the product? 4. For how long can one continue to use this product? What are the adverse effects of long term use of this product? 5. Replacing a meal with Nutricharge S&F may not be a healthy practice. When the product says “for best result follow healthy diet of 1500 calories per day and do regular exercise. Walk daily for a minimum of 6000 steps and climb at least 250 steps every day?. If a consumer does all of this the weight loss will automatically happen. What does it have to do with the performance of the product? 6. Regarding claim 3, is it a promotional paid video or a genuine client review? This needs to be substantiated with independent report. Can the weight loss mentioned by the user in the testimony be achieved just by consuming Nutricharge S&F? 7. As per the ASCI Guidelines for Celebrities in Advertising, a Celebrity should do due diligence to ensure that all description, claims and comparisons made in the advertisements they appear in or endorse are capable of being objectively ascertained and capable of substantiation and should not mislead or appear deceptive. The claims made by the celebrity (Amitabh Bachchan and Sania Mirza) in this advt violate this clause of the ASCI guidelines. According to us, the claims contravene Chapter 1.1 and 1.4 of the ASCI code, the provisions of Guidelines for Celebrity endorsement and the provisions of Drugs & Magic Remedies Act. Action to be taken: We propose that the content should be immediately withdrawn website (https://www.nutricharge. in/products/nutricharge-s-and-f-clinically-proven/"

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant and forwarded the details of the complaint, verbatim, to the advertiser with a request to respond to the same. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat which did not avail, but submitted their written response. The advertiser had stated in their response that Nutricharge S&F is a body fat management supplement. As proved in the clinical trial the supplement along with adoption of a healthy diet and exercise routine can help reduce body fat and waist (abdominal circumference) to an average level mentioned. Weight reduction mentioned by the actual user is his actual experience and may vary. As claim support data, the advertiser provided Evaluation of efficacy and safety of Nutricharge S&F, clinical trial for Nutricharge S&F, and copy of product packaging. The claim support data submitted by the advertiser was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC viewed the website advertisement, examined the complaint, and the response sent by the advertiser as well as the opinion of Technical expert presented at the meeting. The CCC observed that in the clinical research study quoted by the advertiser, a total of 117 subjects had been enrolled . The number of subjects were divided between investigation vs placebo in the ratio 4:1. The CCC considered this disproportionate division of subjects in the study design to be faulty. Various conclusions arrived at in the study are thus questionable. On examining the demographic characteristics with reference to age and gender it was observed that the distribution of female to male is varying widely in the Nutricharge S&F diet and not demographically representative. The distribution of subjects under investigation group with respect to age was also not representative. There was wide variation in percentages of various age groups selected. The diet recommended for the investigation team vs Placebo group was not explained anywhere in the report. The conclusions arrived in this clinical study are not fully validated both by experimental module adopted and also statistically. The CCC concluded that the claims, “Clinically proven to reduce fat and central obesity in men and women”, and “Can reduce up to 11 kg of body weight and up to 4 inch waist size in 3 months”, were inadequately substantiated and are misleading by gross exaggerations. The advertiser did not substantiate that the video testimonial (Shrinik Dhote) was genuine and unpaid by providing evidence from the model appearing in the same.Testimonial claims of a 32 year old man saying that “due to his overweight he was not getting married and his doctor told him that he is at the risk of having diabetes, blood pressure and heart ailments. After searching a lot on internet he found out Nutricharge S&F and started taking it. He has reduced over 7 ½ kgs in 3 months and plans to continue Nutricharge S&F for 3 months more.”, as well as the testimonial itself being by a genuine person were not substantiated with supporting evidence and were misleading by gross exaggeration. The website advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. These complaints were accordingly UPHELD. The complaint regarding endorsement by the Celebrity was examined by the CCC. It was seen that while there are no endorsement statements by the celebrities themselves, the website contains images of the celebrities (Amitabh Bacchan and Sania Mirza) and when seen in conjunction with the unsubstantiated claims, these “tacit” endorsements are likely to mislead consumers regarding product efficacy. This contravenes Clause (d) of the Guidelines for Celebrities in Advertising. This complaint was accordingly UPHELD. The complaint raised against objections of “Who can consume: Anyone of age 12 years and above”, and usage instructions “Dosage: Replace your dinner with one sachet of Nutricharge S&F in a glass of skimmed milk. For best result follow a healthy diet of 1500 calories per day and do regular exercise. Walk daily for a minimum of 6000 steps and climb at least 250 steps every day”, were not considered to be instructions of use. These complaints were NOT UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Trophic Wellness Pvt Ltd."
PRODUCT:"Nutricharge BJ"

COMPLAINT:

"1. It is a special supplement for improving the health of knee joints 2. It contains selected nutrients like milk calcium, rosehip, glucosamine, vitamin K27and boswellia. 3. It helps in promoting knee health besides maintenance and repair of knee joints and cartilages, reduces pain and inflammation and improves mobility and flexibility of knee joints in osteoarthritis. 4. Regular use of Nutricharge BJ can help in avoiding or delaying knee cap surgery 5. For initial results consume it at least for 3 to 6 months 6. The client review of the product show Retired Asst Commissioner of Police, Mumbai and a regular Half Marathon runner saying that since running impacts the knee cartilages, his nutritionist has advised him to take Nutricharge BJ which has several benefits. He also says that it helps senior citizens get the required bone mineral. 7. Who can consume: Anyone with knee joint pain due to aging or erosion 8. Dosage: One tablet along with one sachet in a glass of water daily 9. The product is endorsed by Amitabh Bachchan and Sania Mirza"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"(https://www.nutricharge.in/products/nutricharge-bjclinically-proven/) Our objections: 1. How does Nutricharge BJ improve the health of knee joints? Please substantiate with independent studies which have proven the safety and efficacy of the product. 2. Claims 2, 3, 4 and 6 need to be substantiated with independent studies. 3. Does one need to consult a doctor before consuming the product? Are there any adverse effects of long term use of this product? 4. Is it necessary to take both Nutricharge BJ tablet and powder? 5. Can even aged or people with medical conditions take this supplement? 6. What happens when a person stops using the product? 7. Regarding claim 6, is it a promotional paid video or a genuine client review? Support it with independent data. 8. As per the ASCI Guidelines for Celebrities in Advertising, a Celebrity should do due diligence to ensure that all description, claims and comparisons made in the advertisements they appear in or endorse are capable of being objectively ascertained and capable of substantiation and should not mislead or appear deceptive. The claims made by the celebrity (Amitabh Bachchan and Sania Mirza) in this advt violate this clause of the ASCI guidelines. According to us, the claims contravene Chapter 1.1 and 1.4 of the ASCI code, the provisions of Guidelines for Celebrity endorsement and the provisions of Drugs & Magic Remedies Act. Action to be taken: We propose that the content should be immediately withdrawn"

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant and forwarded the details of the complaint, verbatim, to the advertiser with a request to respond to the same. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat which did not avail, but submitted their written response. The advertiser had stated in their response that individual herbs added to the product is known to help in maintenance and delay joint cartilage degradation. Composite effect has been proved by clinical trial with reduction in pain score and improvement in joint function. With 53.6 - 87.3 % proven improvement in different joint pain and joint function scores, the product is highly likely to help avoid / delay knee joint surgery. In Osteoarthritis index there was 73% reduction in WOMAC scores. 87.3% reduction in pain scale function scores. Patients and Physician perception and improvement in joint parameters were seen. Once the joint parameters improve and there is reduction in pain it implies that it is avoiding or delaying incidences of knee joint surgery. As mentioned by clinical trial for 3 months, no adverse drug reactions were reported thus showing that the product is safe for consumption. As for the complainant’s objection against the promotional paid video or a genuine client review on the website, the advertiser stated that it is a genuine video and not a paid video. They further stated that Mr Amitabh Bachchan and Ms Sania Mirza are their brand Ambassadors and they have entered into an agreement with them after conducting a proper due diligence. They have gone through the clinical trials reports and they are assured of Nutricharge quality. However they are unable to share the agreement due to confidentiality clause. As claim support data, the advertiser provided a copy of clinical trial done on BJ along with soft copy of Nutricharge BJ pack and SF-MPQ scores, glycemic formulation, and evaluation of efficacy and safety of Nutricharge S&F. The claim support data submitted by the advertiser was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC viewed the website advertisement, examined the complaint, and the response sent by the advertiser as well as the opinion of Technical expert presented at the meeting. The CCC observed that substantiation for various claims is an article Clinical trial IAJPS 2016,3(10),1147-1162 submitted by the Advertiser. There is no other independent study or article provided to substantiate the claims. The title of the paper mentions that the study is for Knee Joint Pain in Healthy Elderly population while the Abstract (page 1147) mentions “The Nutrichrge BJ supplement significantly aids in improving physical function, activity and above all the quality of life in the elderly population” Conclusion of the paper (page 1161) mentions “In conclusion, the present investigation suggests that Nutricharge BJ is able to effectively increase the Stiffness Index thereby increasing the BMD and bone health in elderly people both in male and female population. There is no adequate substantiation for these claims except presumption and interpretation. Also what is not in the Title has been added only in the Conclusion (Bone Health aspect). Claim that “Nutricharge BJ helps in promoting knee health besides maintenance and repair of knee joints and cartileges” and “Regular use of Nutricharge BJ can help in avoiding or delaying knee cap surgery” have not been proved unambiguously in the only Clinical trial IAJPS 2016,3(10),1147-1162 given by the Advertiser. The Material and Methods section (page 1149) in the above article states that “This study was performed to assist the SPONSOR in gathering information about the efficacy and safety of Nutricharge BJ for bone health in elderly population. The CCC observed that in the clinical research study quoted by the advertiser, a total of only 35 subjects had been enrolled of which 24 subjects were given the investigational product and 11 subjects were in the placebo group. The CCC considered this disproportionate division of subjects in the study design to be faulty and the sample size was considered to be inadequate to arrive at conclusive results. Various conclusions arrived at in the study are thus questionable. The distribution of subjects under investigation group with respect to age was also not representative as the range for 24 subjects was from 16 to 65. Based on this data, the CCC concluded that the claims, “It is a special supplement for improving the health of knee joints”, “It contains selected nutrients like milk calcium, rosehip, glucosamine, vitamin K27and boswellia”, “It helps in promoting knee health besides maintenance and repair of knee joints and cartilages, reduces pain and inflammation and improves mobility and flexibility of knee joints in osteoarthritis”, “Regular use of Nutricharge BJ can help in avoiding or delaying knee cap surgery”, and “For initial results consume it at least for 3 to 6 months”, were inadequately substantiated and are misleading by gross exaggeration. Testimonial claims of a 62 year old Retired Asst Commissioner of Police, Mumbai and a regular Half Marathon runner saying that “since running impacts the knee cartilages, his nutritionist has advised him to take Nutricharge BJ which has several benefits. Nutricharge BJ has vitamins and minerals which is beneficial for bones and joints. From the past 6 months he has been taking Nutricharge BJ tablets and powder and he now doesn’t feel any pain in his knees and joints”, as well as the testimonial itself being by a genuine person were not substantiated with supporting evidence and are misleading by gross exaggeration. The advertiser did not substantiate that the video testimonial (Prakash Wani) was genuine and unpaid by providing evidence from the model appearing in the same. The website advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. These complaints were accordingly UPHELD. The complaint regarding endorsement by the Celebrity was examined by the CCC. It was seen that while there are no endorsement statements by the celebrities themselves, the website contains images of the celebrities (Amitabh Bachchan and Sania Mirza) and when seen in conjunction with the unsubstantiated claims, these “tacit” endorsements are likely to mislead consumers regarding product efficacy. This contravenes Clause (d) of the Guidelines for Celebrities in Advertising. This complaint was accordingly UPHELD. The objections raised against the statements “Who can consume: Anyone with knee joint pain due to aging or erosion, Dosage: One tablet along with one sachet in a glass of water daily”, were not considered to be “advertising claims”. These complaints were NOT UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Diabetacare"
PRODUCT:"Dried Blackberries 100% organic"

COMPLAINT:

"“Dried blackberries. Directions: use in smoothies, salads, desserts, and baking cakes. It also claims to provide zinc. No ingredients listed on the packaging. Recommended for diabetics. Claims to aid in weight management. These are not blackberries since blackberries do not contain a pit (stone) in their fruit. This is a prune or dried plums. If someone did not know there was a pit inside, they easily could break a tooth like I almost did if using them in the ways directed. It could also cause physical harm of choking or breaking a mixie if used in smoothies. Also, prunes are high in sugar, and these have other ingredients not listed, which may be sugar. This is not healthy snack for diabetics. While prunes do contain a small amount of zinc, blackberries do not. I have never heard of blackberries or prunes helping one manage their weight.”"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant and forwarded the details of the complaint, verbatim, to the advertiser with a request to respond to the same. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat which they did not avail, but submitted their written response. The advertiser had stated in their response that as specified in many nutrition and science journals, many varieties of blackberries do come with large pits. Like cherries, blackberries retain pits when harvested unlike black raspberries where the receptacles stays attached with the plant when harvested. These pits are not removed because the seeds can contain omega-3 (alpha-linolenic acid) and 6 fats (linoleic acid) as well as protein, dietary fiber, carotenoids, ellagitannins and ellagic acid. It is therefore a matter of consumer preference to make use of the seed in one form or the other. Nowhere the packaging claims the blackberries to be seedless and therefore there is no question of misleading a consumer. Moreover, there are numerous videos available on Youtube on how to de-seed the blackberries. As claim support data, the advertiser provided copy of the product packaging, sample of product, FSSAI license, invoice copy from supplier, and literature / journal references on Blackberries. The claim support data submitted by the advertiser was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC viewed the product packaging, examined the complaint, and the response sent by the advertiser as well as the opinion of Technical expert presented at the meeting. The CCC observed that Botanical name of Blackberry being sold by Diabetacare was referred into the classification of Blackberry given under USDA plant species and confirmed that Rubus Laciniatus is the botanical name for Cut Leaf Blackberry. This confirms the product sold by Diabetacare is not Prune. As per USDA data base analysis of Blackberry, it contains 0.53mg Zinc per 100g. These complaints were NOT UPHELD The CCC observed that on back of pack the advertiser has declared content of sugars as zero which contradictory to the USDA database analysis which declares total sugars per 100 gms as 4.88. The CCC considered this label claim to be false and grossly misleading in the context of the product name `Diabetacare 24x7 Diabetes Care’ . The product packaging contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. This complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Flipbald"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"“claiming weight loss of 25kgs in 2 months by Green coffee beans and forme oil. absolutely fake claim and charging 4000 rupees for a month treatment. fake advertisement misleading people like hell. As a doctor I tried to verify the facts and the reality is that flipbald is be- fooling people. More over its a clear violation of drug and magic remedy act. My humble request is that please make them stop such irresponsible advertising and take the necessary action against them for magic remedy act violation.”"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

"“claiming weight loss of 25kgs in 2 months by Green coffee beans and forme oil. absolutely fake claim and charging 4000 rupees for a month treatment. fake advertisement misleading people like hell. As a doctor I tried to verify the facts and the reality is that flipbald is be- fooling people. More over its a clear violation of drug and magic remedy act. My humble request is that please make them stop such irresponsible advertising and take the necessary action against them for magic remedy act violation.” translated in English, “I lost 25 kgs weight in only 2 months”, was not substantiated with evidence of product efficacy and is misleading by exaggeration. Also, efficacy being depicted via images of before and after the treatment are misleading. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Kusum Homeopathic Clinic (Dr Kamal Garg)"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"Special treatment of premature ejaculation, lack of sperms, wet dreams, weakness"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

""Premature Ejaculation - Item no- 47- Schedule J""

 

COMPANY: "Jagat Pharm"
PRODUCT:"Isotine Ayurvedic Eye Drops"

COMPLAINT:

"Dr Basu , with the help of Isotine Eye Drops and various other Ayurvedic medicines has been curing eye problems since 30 years."

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

""Diseases and disorders of the optical system. Item no. 11 - DMR Schedule""

 

COMPANY:"Dr Natasha Ayurvedic Doctor"
PRODUCT:"Ayurved Tablet Kavish Vati"

COMPLAINT:

"1 Every night honeymoon Attention patients suffering from sex problems. 2. If you are not satisfied with your sex life, try Kavish Vati today. 3. After you consume it, you will be satisfying your partner as never before. 4. First time sex will last upto 35 mins, Second time will last 55 mins and third time , 1 hr and 10 mins. 5. Don’t sleep, don’t let your partner sleep and please your life partner 6 The visual in the ad read in conjunction with the claims objected to, implies that the product is meant for the enhancement of sexual pleasure"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

""Maintenance or improvement of the capacity of the human being for sexual pleasure – Item no. 36 – Schedule J""

 

COMPANY:"Dr Natasha Ayurvedic Doctor (Permanent Course Kavish Majun)"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"This ‘Majun’ is for those men who suffer from premature ejaculation. After you consume this …, you will never suffer from timing related problems."

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

""Premature Ejaculation - Item no- 47- Schedule J Maintenance or improvement of the capacity of the human being for sexual pleasure – Item no. 36 – Schedule J""

 

COMPANY:"Dr Natasha Ayurvedic Doctor (Kavish Permanent Penis Tight Cream)"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"The problem of loose penis can be eradicated from roots. After applying this cream, loose penis problem will stop by 100%."

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

""Maintenance or improvement of the capacity of the human being for sexual pleasure – Item no. 36 – Schedule J Improvement in size and shape of the sexual organ and in duration of sexual performance. Item no. 30-Schedule J""

 

COMPANY:"Shree Maruti Herbal"
PRODUCT:"Stay-On Oral Liquid"

COMPLAINT:

"1..A Drink for Couples, to Have More Fun! 2.Fun begins in 30 mins! 3.The visual in the ad read in conjunction with the claims objected to implies that the product is meant for enhancement of sexual pleasure. 4.The advertisement provides link to website(https: //www.stayonpowercapsule.com/stay-on-oral-liquid.html) which refers to & Use the Stay-On Oral Liquid to get over any of the problems like erectile dysfunction or premature ejaculation which may be bothering you, this instantly makes you feel energetic and full of vigor and vitality."

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

"Maintenance or improvement of the capacity of the human being for sexual pleasure – Item no. 36 – Schedule J Premature Ejaculation - Item no- 47- Schedule J"

 

COMPANY: "Shree Maruti Herbal"
PRODUCT: "Stay-On Power Capsules"

COMPLAINT:

"1.""Men swear & Women admire"" 2.The visual in the ad and product packaging read in conjunction with the claims objected to implies that the product are meant for the enhancement of sexual pleasure. (www.stayonpowercapsule.com ) 3.The advertisement provides link to website (https: //www.stayonpowercapsule.com/stay-on-powercapsule.html ; https://www.stayonpowercapsule.com/) which refers to Stay-On Capsules are a miracle of Ayurveda, and while these are very effective for ensuring sexual well being and letting you get over sexual dysfunctions."

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

"Maintenance or improvement of the capacity of the human being for sexual pleasure – Item no. 36 – Schedule J"

 

COMPANY:"Dr Navneet Agarwal"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"Successful treatment of Piles and Fistula"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

"Successful treatment of Piles and Fistula"

 

COMPANY: "Dr. Ayyub Hasan"
PRODUCT:"Maarshal Medical Center"

COMPLAINT:

"Take treatment from world renowned Senior Epilepsy Specialist Dr Ayyub Hasan ‘ Maarshal’and be free from epilepsy forever."

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

"Epilepsy Item no. 17-DMR Schedule Epileptic fits and psychiatric disorders Item no- 16- Schedule J"

 

COMPANY: "Dr Richa’s Unique Clinic"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"Increase Your 2-7 Cm Height Within 2 Months"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

"Stature of persons Item no. 47- DMR Schedule Improvement in height of children/adults Item no. 29-Schedule J"

 

COMPANY:"Sri Bhagwan Mahavir Heart Centre"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"Without bypass and without angioplasty"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

"Heart diseases Item no. 26-DMR Schedule"

 

COMPANY: "Sardar Ji Skin Cure"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"1. freedom from obesity guaranteed. 2. reduce up to 15 kgs 3. Get rid of baldness in 2 hrs 4. White Spots"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

""Obesity Item no. 38-DMR Schedule Item no.39-Schedule J Baldness Item no.5-Schedule J""

 

COMPANY: "Innovative Cure Health and Beauty Clinic"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"increase height from 2 to 5 cms."

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

""Stature of persons Item no. 47- DMR Schedule Improvement in height of children/adults Item no. 29-Schedule J""

 

COMPANY: "Chahal Clinic"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"grow new hair from the roots through best treatment without any surgery."

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

""Growth of new hair Item no. 10-Schedule J""

 

COMPANY: "Yum! Restaurants (India) Private Limited (Pizza Hut)"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"“I would like to bring to your notice an advertisement noticed on television, which apparently violates the ASCI code and does not appear to be entirely honest in their manner of communication. On 16.05.2017, at around 23.32 p.m., in the commercial breaks during the movie ""Apartment 1303"" being aired on Zee Studio channel, I noticed the advertisement of Pizza Hut. In that ad, there is some disclaimer / written information / text on the screen but in very small font, illegible and unreadable and in white font, getting camoflaged in the ad content. Apparently, the small fonts are deliberate and I would presume there is an intent to conceal something. It is a loud and clear message that advertisers are showing disclaimers / other mandatory warning or content only for the sake of complying with some guidelines, but they are not really complying in the real sense and spirit. I request you to look into the matter and do the needful.”"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant and forwarded the details of the complaint, verbatim, to the advertiser with a request to respond to the same. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat which they did not avail, but requested for additional time to submit their response. The advertiser was granted an extension of six days to submit their reply in response to their request for extension. On the advertiser’s request, they were provided with an opportunity to discuss their submission via telecon. Advertiser subsequently submitted their response stating that the TVC has been modified with the changes pertaining to the T&Cs and the pixel standards. They are also coordinating with their Advertising Agency for the change in language of the disclaimer. The CCC viewed the original TVC under complaint, and considered the Advertiser’s response. The CCC concluded that the disclaimers in the TVC complained against were not legible and also not in the same language as the audio of the TVC (Hindi). The TVC contravened Clause (4) (I) and (4) (VII) of the ASCI Guidelines for Disclaimers. The complaint was accordingly UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Dr. Roy health solutions clinic (Dr. Sitesh Roy)"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“Voted Among Best Doctors In America 6 Years In A Row”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"“Dr. Sitesh Roy US Board Certified Allergist & Immunologist MBBS (Mumbai), MD (USA), FAAP, FAAAAI, FACAAI (There is no post graduate degree such as MD(USA). This is misleading because in India, MD is usually a Post Graduate Degree.) VOTED AMONG BEST DOCTORS IN AMERICA 6 YEARS IN A ROW For appointments: 9833553343/24145656 (By whom......? These kinds of bogus certificates can be cheaply purchased by any one) Team of Experts include Dr. Doshi who has been practising for the last nineteen years nationally and for more than ten years Internationally. Dr Doshi is a Face Reader, Medical Astrologer, Aura Specialist, Dream Analyst, Motivator, Weight Loss Specialist, & Energy Enhancement and Stress Management expert. She is also an experienced and well-renowned counselor in the areas of relationships, marriage, business, finance, career, senior citizens and parenting. (Dr. Sitesh Roy's team of experts include face readers.. how such persons can help allergy patients) Dr. Sitesh Roy's Letter Pad shows two degrees - MD, DNB which he does not possess. (the letter pad is attached) This is totally misleading and false advertising.”"

Recommendation: UPHELD

""The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant and forwarded the details of the complaint, verbatim, to the advertiser with a request to respond to the same. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat which they did not avail, but submitted their written response. The advertiser had stated in their response that he has been selected officially into the peer-reviewed Best Doctors in America listing for the years mentioned on the website. The claim ""Voted Among Best Doctors in America 6 years in a Row"", is an honour, that he received while practicing at UMMC, Jackson, MS. The first time he was listed was in 2005-2006 and then again in 2007-2008, then again in 2009-2010 and finally in 2011-2012. He received this prestigious, peer-review based Listing Among the Best Doctors in America for 8 years in a row, however during the website designing it was listed only as 6 years in a row. As claim support data, the advertiser provided copies of registration certificates of Maharashtra Medical Council, Mumbai and Medical Council of India, copies of certificates of `Best Doctor’ certifying that Dr. Sitesh R Roy has been selected as one of the best doctors in America for 2005-2006 and 2007-2008. The CCC viewed the website advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. The CCC observed that Dr. Sitesh R Roy has provided proof of his registration with Medical Council of India as well as Maharashtra Medical Council for additional medical qualification registration with the Maharashtra Medical Council of MD in Paediatrics University of Illinois Hospitals at Chicago in 2000, and the documents have a reference to his Registration number 79537. Based on this data, the CCC concluded that the qualification of the doctor has been substantiated. This complaint was NOT UPHELD. Regarding the “Best Doctors” award, the CCC noted that the award being mentioned was for one financial year (such as 2005-06) and not for two years as interpreted by the advertiser. Advertiser provided proof of his listing among “best doctors in America” for only two years i.e. 2005-06 and 2007-08. The claim, “Voted Among Best Doctors In America 6 Years In A Row”, was thus not substantiated, and is misleading by exaggeration. The CCC also expressed its reservations regarding the “Best Doctors” award process and lack of any disclaimers in the advertisement to provide a reference to consumers regarding the nature of this poll. The website advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. This complaint was UPHELD.""

 

COMPANY: "AIM Bhopal "
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"“The advertisement was recently published in a National Daily Newspaper by a Coaching Institution named, AIM Bhopal. The institution showed results of CLAT 2017 (Common Law Admission Test). One of the most misleading advertisements seen in recent times. 1. 'From the first time in Bhopal an institution has given selections from the Crash Course' Explanation: Totally incorrect. It has been happening every year. 2. The photographs of the students shown are misleading. The All India Ranks mentioned are category ranks whereas the advertisement with no mention of the category tries to dodge the reader who will consider it to be a general category rank. 3. The advertisement mentions nothing of the ranks, marks etc but has just shown the pictures without any information. This misleads the reader and creates confusion. By category ranks we mean that the ranks are under Schedule Caste, OBC or Schedule Tribe Category which isn't mentioned in the advertisement. The advertisement tries to show that they are General Category Ranks.”"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant and forwarded the details of the complaint, verbatim, to the advertiser with a request to respond to the same. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat which they did not avail but submitted their written response. Advertiser in their response stated that they have only tried to convey to the readers that their institute has given selection in AILET and NLIU Bhopal from crash course programme. No institute has ever given such an advertisement as it is not easy to give such result in a very short duration programme. Only these students of Bhopal from the crash course programme have 'made to NLIU Bhopal and AILET and no other students either from general or reserved category, studying in any other CLAT institutes in Bhopal were selected in NLIU Bhopal and AILET from crash course programme. Thus they decided to publish their rank without mentioning their category. This year their institute has given more than 50+ selections in this examination. As it is not possible to mention the names of each and every student along with their photographs in the advertisement, they decided to publish the name and photographs of 12 students only. As claim support data, the advertiser provided details of these 12 students with photographs, rank, roll number and allotted college. Upon carefully viewing the print advertisement, examining the complaint and the response given by the advertiser, the CCC concluded that – Claim, “For the first time in Bhopal an institute has given selection in AILET and NLIU Bhopal from crash course programme”, was not substantiated with any verifiable comparative data of the advertiser’s institute and other similar institutes to prove that they were the first in Bhopal to give selection from crash course programme, Further more, the claim is misleading by ambiguity and exaggeration. The photographs of the 2 students shown with All India Ranks are misleading by omission of mention of the ranking being “category category ranking” and not general ranking. As for the photographs of other students shown, the advertisement was misleading by omission of mention of their ranking. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "CL Educate Ltd"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"“The advertisement was recently published in a National Daily News paper by a Coaching Institution named, Success Ahead. The institution showed results of CLAT 2017 (Common Law Admission Test) 1. The AIR 58 mentioned does not qualify as a result. AIR 58 of CLAT 2017 is Mr. Kabeer Jay. The name and the photograph give in the newspaper is of Mr. Kabir Jaiswal. The information is incorrect. 2. AIR 58 (Mr. Kabeey Jay) is not a Career Launcher student. The mentioned student Mr. Kabir Jaiswal is not AIR 58. He wasn't even selected in the National Law Universities in CLAT 2017. 3. The advertisement tried to dodge the reader by showing results as classroom studying students in 2016-2017 session. All the shown students under the Bhopal Centre results are their Test Series students or previous years students. The advertisement does not mention anything about the same. Please find attached the official Rank List of CLAT 2017 It clearly states that the AIR 58 is Mr. Kabeer Jay and not Mr. Kabeer Jaiswal as shown in the advertisement. Find below official college allotment list of NLSIU Bangalore http://clat2017.admissionhelp.com/CLAT/UniversityList.aspx?id=1 Please follow the following steps once you click the link 1. Select Course – UG Course and Click Submit 2. Click on NLSIU Bangalore for the allotment list of the college. Here you will see that All India Rank 58 is Mr. Kabeer Jay and not Mr. Kabir Jaiswal as shown by the advertisement. The picture shown is totally incorrect.”"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant and forwarded the details of the complaint, verbatim, to the advertiser with a request to respond to the same. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser had, however, not responded to ASCI’s request. The CCC noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the prescribed due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the print advertisement. Advertiser did not provide evidence to prove that the mentioned student Mr. Kabir Jaiswal is AIR 58. The complainant provided a copy of the official Rank List of CLAT 2017 which shows that the AIR 58 is Mr. Kabeer Jay and not Mr. Kabir Jaiswal as shown in the advertisement. In the absence of response from the advertiser, and based on the evidence provided by the complainant, the CCC concluded that showing Kabir Jaiswal as AIR 58 in the advertisement is misleading and is misrepresentation of facts. The advertiser did not provide data to substantiate that all the students shown under the Bhopal Centre results are their Test Series students and not previous years students, which is also misleading. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Alphathum Housing Project"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"The advertisement aired on fm radio 104.8 channel describes the cost price of various asset classes at the time of tendulkar starting his cricket career and documents the rise in prices and the present market value and insists that if one had invested when tendulkar had started batting, the investor could also have retired alongwith tendulkar, implying that anyone who had invested then in the particular asset class that is being advertised could also have made that much money. The advertisement talks of gold, shares and other asset classes, but not the one being sold by the group, which is housing. The advertisement does not talk about the increase in the housing prices or the real estate scenario, which is what is being sold. And that is what i am saying is objectionable, not mentioning the increase in rates of the product being sold and instead mentioning all other products whose prices have gone up, thereby misselling the product in question."

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant and forwarded the details of the complaint, verbatim, to the advertiser with a request to respond to the same. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat which they did not avail, but submitted their written response. The advertiser had stated in their response that the advertisement only provides for prices of various commodities at a certain time and shows how the prices have increased over a period thereby only implying how one can gain with time by investing in the real estate sector which has risen tremendously in last so many years. The CCC heard the radio spot and considered the advertiser’s response. The CCC noted that the advertiser did not provide any details of the investment scheme. The CCC concluded that the advertisement inviting consumers to invest in the housing project, without appropriate disclaimers was misleading by omission. The radio spot contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Strides Consumer Private Limited"
PRODUCT:"Nixit nicotine lozenges"

COMPLAINT:

"“The objectionable portion of the electronic (i.e. website) and print media advertisement of Strides has been described as below: I. In the website the Marketer has claimed that: ""Nicotine lozenges are unique and better than nicotine gums because: a. Can reduce withdrawal symptoms significantly b. Easy to use, no need to chew c. Unique with controlled release of nicotine d. Higher quit rate e. Lesser chances of relapse f Lesser chances of quitting-related weight gain g. Can be used by smokers having dentures or jaw pain 2. In the posters/danglers and other POS materials the Marketer has claimed that ""Nicotine Lozenges are more effective than Gum"" 1. The advertisement disparages the products of CHL by suggesting and indicating that ""Lozenges are more effective than Gums” without any clinical data or any other substantiation. The study referred to by the Marketer infact states that “Both Lozenges and Gums are equally effective” which clearly indicates that the claim statement fails the test of truthfulness and is completely false and deceptive. 2. None of the advertisement claims stated are supported by independent research or assessment, the source of the data is not indicated in the advertisement. The study which was referred in the advertisement infact is completely silent on the claims made by the Marketer and there is not even a whisper in the study referred to by the Marketer which can even remotely suggest that Lozenges are more effective than Gums or any of the claims as made by the Marketer. 3. The advertisement has conferred an unjustified advantage on the product advertised and has bought ridicule and disrepute to CHL. The Marketer is aware that Nicotex® Gums which is the product of CHL is the undisputed market leader in the category and by unjustly & untruly comparing its Lozenges with Gums intended to ridicule the product of the CHL without any substantiation. 4. The Marketer has made a claim of ""Higher Quit Rate"" in comparison with the Gums but are silent on the basis of such claim. They have not even produced a single study or Literature to substantiate such claim. 5. The claim of the Marketer that ""Nicotine lozenges are unique and better than nicotine gums because can reduce withdrawal symptoms significantly"" is also false, deceptive and misleading. The marketer has not provided any data/study to show that how Lozenges are effective than Gums in reducing withdrawal symptoms. 6. The comparisons done by the Marketer in relation to Nicotine Lozenges with Nicotine Gums are false, inaccurate and not capable of substantiation. The Marketer failed to understand and appreciate that Gums and Lozenges are different format of the same drug namely Nicotine Polacrilex and both the formats have definite advantages and disadvantages over one another, instead the marketer with the illegal motive of gaining market share have made such false, fabricated and deceptive claims, which is completely uncalled for and need to restrained.”"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant and forwarded the details of the complaint, verbatim, to the advertiser with a request to respond to the same. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat which they availed, and submitted their written response. They further sought for Informal Resolution of the complaint by modifying some of the objected claims, however, they did not fulfil the pre-requisites by confirming compliance within the stipulated period. Therefore, the complaint was processed for CCC deliberations. The advertiser had stated in their response that the product is prepared in a Lozenges format of Nicotine that aims at assisting to help quit smoking among smokers. There are established independent study report which says that Nicotine Lozenges produce superior effect in men than Gums. Also, as seen in the study result referred therein, the quit rate was significantly higher than the Nicotine Gum quit rate, and Nicotine Lozenges provide a higher dose of Nicotine than Gums. As claim support data, the advertiser provided study materials available in the public domain - Independent study titled ""A Comparison of the Nicotine Lozenge and Nicotine Gum An Effectiveness Randomized Controlled Trial"", ""Pharmacology of Nicotine: Addiction, Smoking-Induced Disease, and Therapeutics"", ""Nicotine replacement therapy for smoking cessation"", Instruction for using Nicotine Gum and How you use Nicotine Gum, copy of product licence, and copy of product packaging. The claim support data submitted by the advertiser was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC examined the complaint, viewed the website/internet advertisement, Ad – posters/danglers, and the response sent by the advertiser as well as the opinion of Technical expert presented at the meeting. The CCC observed that the data being referred to by the advertiser was regarding a different set of formulations (gum as well as lozenge formats) tested in USA in year 2008. The advertiser did not provide India product specific efficacy data nor were they able to extrapolate the 2008 study results to their own products or to that of competition. The CCC was of the view that the product efficacy is highly dependent on the specific formulation, more so for a slow release product. As the advertiser has not tested their product versus the complainant’s product (which is a market leader), the CCC considered that the comparison being made is not based on facts. The CCC concluded that the claims, ""Nicotine lozenges are unique and better than nicotine gums because: Can reduce withdrawal symptoms significantly”, “Unique with controlled release of nicotine”, “Higher quit rate”, “Lesser chances of relapse”, “Lesser chances of quitting-related weight gain”, ""Nicotine Lozenges are more effective than Gum"", were not substantiated with product specific clinical data, and are misleading by exaggeration. The CCC also concluded that the claim, by implication unfairly denigrates the complainant’s product and other similar competitive products in the same category. The website/internet advertisement and the Ad – posters/danglers contravened Chapters, I.1, I.4 and IV.1 (e) of the ASCI Code. This complaint was UPHELD. The CCC did not consider the product descriptors, “Easy to use, no need to chew”, and “Can be used by smokers having dentures or jaw pain”, to be objectionable. This complaint was NOT UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Hindustan Unilever Ltd"
PRODUCT:"Dove Hairfall Shampoo"

COMPLAINT:

"“Claim in the TVC: Unbeatable Hair Fall Protection Disclaimers associated with the above are as follows: With reference to hair breakage. Dove vs. common Re. 1 and Rs. 2 anti-hair fall shampoo sachets based on lab test for breaking of hair. Key Concerns in the TVC 1. The TVC is predominantly targeted towards making a top-parity claim i.e. 'Unbeatable Hair Fall Protection', however, it suggests that Dove is better than all other methods of hair fall protection (Despite of all your attempts) making a comparison in the frame with 'Other Hair Fall Shampoos' and in the VO is with all other shampoos (compared 10 other shampoos). The disclaimer qualifies it further by limiting it to only Re.1 and Rs.2 anti-hair fall shampoos. You would appreciate that the communication in the TVC is clearly contorted and is stated ambiguously to mislead the consumer. 2. You would further note that Frame 1 of the TVC depicts Dove shampoo providing nourishment at the root of the hair, whilst the intended benefit is directed in the TVC only towards hair breakage i.e. conditioning effect of the shampoo. 3. Additionally, in Frame 2 HUL on the right side of the frame has shown no hair breakage (where Dove sachet is shown) and hence making an absolute claim of Zero hair fall. It is also pertinent to note that Frame 2 flagrantly exhibits superiority of Dove over other shampoos as no hair breakage has been shown. This again is in contravention of the 'Unbeatable Hair Fall Protection' claim. 4. Moreover, our data, which is in line with industry proven science, suggests that although shampoo can help to prevent hair fall it will not completely eliminate it. Additionally several Re. I and Rs 2 shampoo sachets are formulated to provide performance in line with Dove and therefore the comb comparison will not indicate an obvious difference for the normal consumer. 5. Further, in the absence of a clear categorization of 'Hair Fall Shampoos', the manner in which HUL has categorized and qualified 'HairFall Shampoos' also casts a shroud of doubt on the efficacy and truthfulness of the lab tests conducted by the HUL.”"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant and forwarded the details of the complaint, verbatim, to the advertiser with a request to respond to the same. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat which they availed, and submitted their written response. The advertiser had stated in their response that tests have been carried out on those shampoo sachets (priced upto Rs.2/-) which claims to provide benefits against hair fall and the tested products accounts for about 80% of the market in this segment. The results of the tests clearly indicate that the Product is delivering unbeatable efficacy against hair fall due to breakage as against other shampoos claiming the same benefit and what has been depicted in the TVC is the outcome of these test results. As claim support data, the advertiser provided copy of test reports from independent third party. The claim support data submitted by the advertiser was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC carefully examined the complaint, viewed the TVC and the detailed response sent by the advertiser as well as the opinion of Technical expert presented at the meeting. The CCC observed that the third party test does substantiate the claim, “Unbeatable Hair Fall Protection”. This complaint was NOT UPHELD. Advertiser further stated that the Product has ingredients like Lysine, Zinc Gluconate, Sunflower Oil, Climbazole and Glycerine which are known to provide nourishment to hair strands . Moreover, there is no intention to show nourishment of the hair roots as is clear from the VO and the visuals of the TVC. Furthermore, the Complainant themselves have shown a similar visual in one of their currently on air TVC in order to show nourishment and strengthening of Hair. The CCC viewed the complainant’s TVC and observed that the complainant in their TVC has used a similar visual showing nourishment of hair. This complaint was NOT UPHELD. The frame showing depiction of Hair Breakage on comb shows some hair strands on the side where Dove sachet is shown in order to depict lesser hair breakage as compared to majority of the shampoos in the same category within the boundaries of acceptable advertising practices and creative liberty. Here again, the Complainant’s TVC also shows similar comparative frame. In support of these arguments, the advertiser provided a copy of the Complainant’s TVC. The CCC viewed the complainant’s TVC and observed that the depiction of hair breakage in the TVC under consideration appeared to be disproportionate to the quantitative findings of the tests conducted. The CCC concluded that the visuals showing lesser hair fall for Dove were misleading by exaggeration. This complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Scot Apparels"
PRODUCT:"Scotlane"

COMPLAINT:

"Misleading and incorrect usage of Most Trusted Brand has been used by Scotlane"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant and forwarded the details of the complaint, verbatim, to the advertiser with a request to respond to the same. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat which they did not avail, but submitted their written response. The advertiser had stated in their response that the claim is made on the basis of an award received by them at an event in Mumbai from the awarding organization International Brand Consulting Corporation, USA., in October 2016. As claim support data, the Advertiser provided a copy of the award and certificate, photograph and video recording of award receiving ceremony which indicated that the award was for a specific category of “Fashion Retailers” and for the year 2016. However, the CCC observed that the advertiser did not provide the details of the process how the selection for award was done i.e. survey methodology, questionnaires used, names of other similar institutes that were part of the survey and the outcome. No data was submitted regarding the authenticity and credibility of the awarding organization. Upon carefully viewing the print advertisement, examining the complaint and the response given by the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “Winner of India’s Most Trusted Brand”, was not adequately substantiated, and is misleading by ambiguity and exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was accordingly UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Vedavyasa Trust "
PRODUCT:"Vedavyasa Institute of Technology"

COMPLAINT:

"This is the advertisement of a Vedavyasa institute of technology, a self financing engineering college in Malappuram district, Kerala. They falsely claim 100% results in Btech while in reality it is as low as 0% in some courses. The advertisement claims 94% success for Btech courses in the college. (0.05 mins, in the video) They also say that the institution is famous for placements (0.07 mins). However kindly see a few screenshots of their mandatory disclosure as per the AICTE norms: Not even a single student was placed in these courses. I could not find the recent data to prove authentically that their pass percentage is also a bogus claim, however see this, not even a single student had distinction or a first class. However I am personally aware that the pass percentage is nowhere close to the claimed 94%. You may kindly issue a notice to the college"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant and forwarded the details of the complaint, verbatim, to the advertiser with a request to respond to the same. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser had, however, not responded to ASCI’s request. The CCC noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the prescribed due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the YouTube advertisement and upon careful consideration of the complaint, and in the absence of any comments or response from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims, “100% results in Btech”, “94% success for Btech courses in the college”, “institution is famous for placements”, were not substantiated with verifiable supporting data, and were misleading by exaggeration. The Web-site - YouTube advertisement was therefore considered as contravening the Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was accordingly UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Nachiketa Higher Secondary School"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"Nachiketa Higher Secondary School, Napier Town, Jabalpur M.P. They have been mis-guiding the general public by mentioning the clause & phrase- ""100% Job Placement"" In reality, being a student, I claim that the institute does not provide for any job guarantee or assured placement to the students undergoing the course. We truly appreciate ""The Advertising Standards Council of India"" & the work you people are doing to vanish the fraudulent activities of various institutes & organisations, running across & mis-guiding people in various manners. This is a kind information to the ""The Advertising Standards Council of India"" to review the advertisements being published by such institutes, and request you to take legal actions against them, so that they stop mis-guiding For your kind knowledge & reference, attached are thee snaps of mis-leading advertisements"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant and forwarded the details of the complaint, verbatim, to the advertiser with a request to respond to the same. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser had, however, not responded to ASCI’s request. The CCC noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the prescribed due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and upon careful consideration of the complaint, and in the absence of any comments or response from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims, “100% Job Placement”, was not substantiated with authentic supporting data such as detailed list of students who have been placed through their Institute, contact details of students for verification, enrolment forms and appointment letters received by the students, nor any independent audit or verification certificate. Also, the claim is misleading by exaggeration. The print advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was accordingly UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "MSR India Limited"
PRODUCT:"Dr Copper Seamless Copper Bottle"

COMPLAINT:

“Drinking water from this bottle, helps cure/prevent obesity, joint pain, diabetes, thyroid and cancer like dangerous diseases.”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat which they availed, and submitted their written response. They were also provided with an opportunity to discuss their submission via telecon, at which time they informed that the said advertisement is no longer being aired, and also sought for Informal Resolution (IR) of Complaint. However, they did not complete the IR formalities prior to the due date for the same. Therefore, the complaint was processed for CCC deliberations. The advertiser had stated in their response that the TVC does not mislead the consumers that the product cures or prevent the said diseases. It is only one of the medical methods to avoid some kind of diseases in advance, for which human beings are knowingly using the different types of Copper vessels in their daily life and taking precautions to avoid some kind of diseases in their life time. As claim support data, the advertiser provided journal references on copper being medically a useful metal. The claim support data submitted by the advertiser was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC carefully examined the complaint, the TVC and the response sent by the advertiser as well as the opinion of Technical expert presented at the meeting. The CCC concluded that the claim, “Drinking water from this bottle, helps cure/prevent obesity, joint pain, diabetes, thyroid and cancer like dangerous diseases”, was not substantiated with conclusive evidence or published scientific research data, and is misleading by gross exaggeration. The TVC contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Xiaomi Logistics"
PRODUCT:"MI Redmi Note 4"

COMPLAINT:

“India's No.1 selling Smartphone”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: NOT UPHELD

"The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat which they did not avail, but submitted their preliminary response through their Advocates. Advocate raised a query about validity, enforceability and fairness of the ASCI proceedings, and further requested for an extension of 30 days to respond. The Advocate was directed by ASCI to refer to the website of ASCI and DOCA for more details. The advertiser was granted an extension of eight days to the standard lead time of seven days to submit their reply in response to their request for extension. Subsequently, the advocate on behalf of the advertiser submitted their written response. On the advocate’s request, the advertiser representatives were provided with an opportunity to discuss their submission via telecon. As claim support data, the advocate provided a copy of a Report by Counterpoint Technology Market Research, a press release by International Data Corporation (IDC), News reports by Gadgets 360, Zee Business News, DNA India, International Business Times, Gizbot, by Emit Post and by Telecom Talk. The claim support data submitted by the advertiser was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC carefully examined the complaint, the print advertisement and the response sent by the advertiser as well as the opinion of Technical expert presented at the meeting. Specific to the advertiser’s objection regarding complaint processing by ASCI, as per the CCC, the Hon’ble Supreme Court has, in a recent judgement titled “Common Cause (A Regd Society) v Union of India and Ors”, has affirmed and recognised the self-regulatory mechanism put in place by bodies like ASCI as an effective pre-emptive step to statutory provisions in the sphere of media regulation for TV and Radio programmes in India. The grievance redressal platform provided by self-regulatory bodies like ASCI, therefore, function as the first step for aggrieved consumers against content in the media which might not be in line with the existing laws. Regarding the claim support data presented by the advertiser, the CCC observed that Annexure 1.2, is the Press Release by IDC and pertains to Q1 of 2017. The analysis is based on smartphones that were shipped in India. All other Annexures pertain to mobile phone shipments made in Q2. Annexure 1.1 is the findings released by Counterpoint Technology Market Research report for the service that is called Market Monitor. Exhibit 2 (of Annexure 1.1) reports on India’s Top Smartphone models in Q2. Here, Xiaomi Redmi Note 4 is reported to be the largest selling brand with a 7.2% share. The next largest selling brand is Xiaomi Redmi 4 with a share of 4.5% in Q2. Based on the data that has been presented over both Q1 and Q2 (using both IDC and Counterpoint analysis), and in the absence of any contradictory data of other competitors, the CCC concluded that the claim that Xiaomi Redmi Note 4 is “India's No.1 selling Smartphone”, was substantiated. The complaint was NOT UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Amity University"
PRODUCT:"Amity Law School"

COMPLAINT:

“India Today ranks Amity among India’s Top-5 Law Schools In ‘The Best Colleges of India ‘issue dtd.22nd May 17”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: NOT UPHELD

"The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat which they did not avail, but submitted their written response. The advertiser had stated in their response that the claim is factually correct as the India Today magazine has ranked Amity Law School at the fourth position according to their 2017 survey on “Best Colleges of India”. As claim support data, the advertiser provided a copy of the rankings page, as appeared in the magazine, with a copy of the cover of the India Today issue. Upon carefully viewing the print advertisement, examining the complaint and the response given by the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “India Today ranks Amity among India’s Top-5 Law Schools In ‘The Best Colleges of India ‘issue dtd.22nd May 17”, was substantiated. The complaint was NOT UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Unique Publishers"
PRODUCT:"Unique Shiksha"

COMPLAINT:

“India's best* institute for Civil Services Preparations”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat which they did not avail. As claim support data, the advertiser provided a web link for details of the award winners. As this response was inadequate without the relevant claim support data, ASCI requested the advertiser to provide details of survey methodology used for the selection of the awards. The advertiser did not provide this information in time for the CCC meeting. The CCC viewed the print advertisement, examined the complaint and verified the website link referred to in the advertiser’s response http://www.educationbiz.in/congress/award-winners.php and observed that it showed the Indian Education award winners of 2017, in which the advertiser’s institute featured in the list in the category of `Civil Services Coaching’ with no reference to it being India’s best. The claim made in the advertisement of the advertiser’s institute being India’s Best is qualified as “as recognised by Indian Education Congress Awards – 2015 & 16”. Advertiser did not provide data for 2015-16, the basis on which the claim was made. Based on this verification, the CCC concluded that the claim, “India's best* institute for Civil Services Preparations”, was inadequately substantiated and is misleading by ambiguity and exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Smt. T. V. Mehta Charitable Foundation"
PRODUCT:"B.H. Gardi College of Engineering and Technology"

COMPLAINT:

“100% Placement Assistance”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat which they did not avail but submitted their written response. Advertiser in their response stated that placement assistance is a form of support provided to job seekers from all walks of life by a variety of different sources. They are providing services to their students as they are implementing for better employment opportunities of their students in form of placement assistance. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the advertiser’s response. The CCC concluded that the use of 100% numerical is not relevant for “placement assistance” claim. The use of “100%” as a descriptor in the claim is misleading by implication. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapter I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Dhaanish Ahmed Group of Institutions"
PRODUCT:"Dhaanish Ahmed Institute of Technology"

COMPLAINT:

“Placement provided for all the students in the batch 2013-2017”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat which they did not avail but submitted their written response. As claim support data, the advertiser provided placed students’ report with offer letters. The CCC examined the complaint, the print advertisement and the data sent by the advertiser, and concluded that the claim, “Placement provided for all the students in the batch 2013-2017”, was inadequately substantiated with authentic supporting data such as detailed list of students who have been placed through their Institute for batch 2013-2017 , contact details of students for verification, enrolment forms and appointment letters received by the students, nor any independent audit or verification certificate. The claim is misleading by exaggeration. The print advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was accordingly UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "CKS Integrate College of Education"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“Won 8 Awards in Whole District”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat which they did not avail but submitted their written response. Advertiser in their response stated that they received many awards from various society, Company and Register Kalai Manrangal, and Rotary Club etc. As claim support data, the advertiser gave names of the awards received by them with a photograph of the awards. However, no other details regarding these awards were submitted by the advertiser and in the context of the advertisement for educational institute for the courses advertised, the CCC did not consider theese awards to be relevant as a claim support for claiming to have won 8 Awards in Whole District. Upon viewing the print advertisement, examining the complaint and the response received from the advertiser, the CCC observed that some of these awards were not relevant in the context to claim the CCC concluded that the claim, “Won 8 Awards in Whole District”, was not adequately substantiated, and is misleading by ambiguity and implication. The print advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was accordingly UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Kingston Engineering College"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“100% Placement Record”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat which they did not avail, and submitted their written response. The advertiser had stated in their response that for the year 2017, 700 job offer letters and 100% placement record is factually true and there is nothing false/misleading in it. As this response was inadequate without the relevant claim support data, ASCI requested the advertiser to provide a certificate from an independent agency, or from a Chartered Accountant, for the total number of students admitted in 2016-17 and copies of the 700 Job-Offer letters given to their students who have completed their courses in 2016-17. The advertiser did not provide this information in time for the CCC meeting. The CCC viewed the print advertisement, examined the complaint and the response given by the advertiser. The CCC concluded that the claim, “100% Placement Record”, was not substantiated with authentic supporting data such as detailed list of students who have been placed through their Institute, contact details of students for verification, enrolment forms and appointment letters received by the students, nor any independent audit or verification certificate. Also, the claim is misleading by exaggeration. The print advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was accordingly UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Lovely Professional University"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"1. “610 students hired by cognizant in a single day” 2. “LPU sets the record of the Highest Placements in North India for three consecutive years.”"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objections raised in the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat which they did not avail, but submitted their written response. As claim support data, the advertiser provided copy of email of September 2014 from ‘Cognizant’ with the list of selection and contact details of students. Upon carefully viewing the print advertisement, examining the complaint and the response given by the advertiser, the CCC observed that the advertiser provided an old data of 2014 and this data was considered authentic as it was not audited nor stamped. The CCC concluded that the claim, “610 students hired by cognizant in a single day”, was inadequately substantiated. No claim support data was furnished for the claim, “LPU sets the record of the Highest Placements in North India for three consecutive years”, that compared data of the advertiser’s institute and other similar institutes. The claims are also misleading by ambiguity and exaggeration. The print advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was accordingly UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Haier Appliances India Pvt Ltd"
PRODUCT:"Haier refrigerator"

COMPLAINT:

"1. Haier has been the world no 1 deep freezer brand continuously for the past 8 years 2. Wide range of deep freezers 3. Up to 40% savings in electricity 4. 5 year warranty on compressor"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"1. Which is the survey based on which Haier claims to be world no 1 deep freezer brand? 2. How does it claim to give 40% savings in electricity? 3. Claims 1‐4 need to be substantiated with data from independent scientific studies According to us, the advertisement contravenes Chapter 1.1 and 1.5 of ASCI code”"

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant and forwarded the details of the complaint, verbatim, to the advertiser with a request to respond to the same. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat which they did not avail, but submitted their written response post the due date. The advertiser had stated in their response that the claim of being World’s No. 1 deep freezer brand is based on the research of Euromonitor International Ltd. Depending upon model to model they have tested the electricity consumption capacity of similar nature of products available in the market based on which the claim of 40% electricity savings had been made. Haier has 20 models of deep freezers and 2 models of wine chillers and 3 models of visi coolers. For the 5 year warranty on compressor, it is an offer that if a person purchases the Deep Freezer manufactured by Haier then the compressor will be repaired/replaced (if required) during the period of warranty. As this response was inadequate without the relevant claim support data being furnished, ASCI requested the advertiser to provide a copy of the research report of Euromonitor International Ltd, and an independent agency report for saving on 40% electricity. The advertiser did not provide this information in time for the CCC meeting. Upon carefully viewing the print advertisement, examining the complaint and the response given by the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim (in Gujarati) as translated in English, “Haier has been the World’s No. 1 deep freezer brand continuously for the past 8 years”, was not substantiated with any verifiable comparative data of the advertiser’s product and other competitor products, or any third party validation. Claim, “Upto 40% savings in electricity”, was not substantiated with comparative technical data/test reports. The claims are misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. These complaints were UPHELD. The claims, “Wide range of deep freezers”, and “5 year warranty on compressor”, were not considered to be objectionable. These complaints were NOT UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Bharti Airtel Ltd"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“On the website of Airtel they have mentioned some recharge pack. With description in Rs 244 get (Unlimited Local & STD Airtel call &1GB/day 4G/3G/2G for 70 days (On 4G HS 4G SIM). The writing way of this advertisement on there website means that customer will get unlimited local calls plus Unlimited STD AIRTEL. But they dont mean that they say that its only unlimited airtel local calls. They misleading and now not accepting there mistake. File attached. I have already asked airtel cst care but they are saying its not there fault.”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant and forwarded the details of the complaint, verbatim, to the advertiser with a request to respond to the same. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat which they did not avail, but submitted their written response stating that the said advertisement is being modified and sought for Informal Resolution of the complaint. They were also provided with an opportunity to discuss their submission via telecon. Advertiser further stated that it has become a norm across the industry to use the term “unlimited” with an FUP (Fair Usage Policy) condition, in order to prevent mis-use through spamming and unsolicited communication by certain categories of telecom users. In fact, all Telecom Operators are using similar terminology in their advertisements. However, as the proposed modification did not address the concerns raised in the complaint, the complaint was processed for CCC deliberations. Upon carefully viewing the website advertisement, examining the complaint and the response given by the advertiser, the CCC concluded that as the advertiser did not clarify if the said benefit claimed is indeed Unlimited for Local & STD or capped at a particular limit, the claim, “Rs 244 - Unlimited Local + STD Airtel call +1GB/day 4G/3G/2G for 70 days (On 4G HS + 4G SIM)”, was misleading by ambiguity and exaggeration. The web-site advertisement contravened Chapter I.4 of the ASCI Code as well as Clause 1 of ASCI Guidelines for Disclaimers (“A disclaimer can expand or clarify a claim, make qualifications, or resolve ambiguities, to explain the claim in further details, but should not contradict the material claim made or contradict the main message conveyed by the advertiser or change the dictionary meaning of the words used in the claim as received or perceived by a consumer.”). The complaint was accordingly UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Lifezen Healthcare Pvt Ltd-"
PRODUCT:"Wonder Pro The sugar Probiotic"

COMPLAINT:

"1. Daily lo? WonderPro. The Super Probiotic 2. Super action of 5 super probiotics 3. Boosts immunity. Fights infections, rectifies imbalance of good and bad bacteria cause by stress, lack of sleep and unhealthy food. 4. Improves digestion. Reduces constipation and digestion problems even when you eat fried or spicy food 5. Better metabolism. Reduces fatigue by breaking down complex food easily. 6. Stimulate vitamin-B. encourages production of Vitamin-B12, which keeps your nervous system and blood circulation healthy. 7. Fights bloating. Healthy bacteria removes toxins, thereby reducing gas and bloating 8. Benefits of WonderPro are best experienced when consumed daily."

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"Our objections: 1. Is the quantity of the probiotic significant enough to meet all the claims? Reports from independent agencies are required to substantiate this. 2. Can even aged with medical conditions like diabetes, blood pressure, heart conditions consume this? Does one need to consult a doctor before consuming this? 3. Are there any side effects of over dosage? 4. Has the product been approved by any National/International Regulatory Authority? 5. Has the results been confirmed by an Independent Agency? 6. How long does it take for product to show results? What conditions are required for this? 7. How long does the effect lasts? What conditions are required for this? 8. What is the dosage of this product? 9. For how long can one continue to use this product? 10. What are the adverse effects of long term use of this product? 11. Claims 1-8 need to be substantiated with independent data According to us, this contravenes Chapter 1.1 and 1.4 of ASCI code Action to be taken: We propose that the content should be immediately withdrawn"

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant and forwarded the details of the complaint, verbatim, to the advertiser with a request to respond to the same. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat which they did not avail, but requested for an extension to respond to the complaint. The advertiser was granted an extension of five days to the standard lead time of seven days to submit their reply in response to their request for extension of 7 days. Subsequently, the advertiser submitted their written response. Advertiser had stated in their response that Wonderpro is safe to use and is termed sugar free. It is classified under OTC by the DCGI and therefore can be sold without a prescription. The product is a daily supplement and must be consumed daily and continuously to see the effects. The each of the 5 bacteria combination in the formula has a different benefit. As claim support data, the advertiser provided journal references based on established studies and their findings for the claimed effect of the product, copy of product packaging, and copy of regulatory license. The claim support data submitted by the advertiser was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC carefully examined the complaint, the print advertisement and the response sent by the advertiser as well as the opinion of Technical expert presented at the meeting. Based on the references and data presented, the CCC concluded that the claims, “Daily lo? WonderPro. The Super Probiotic”, “Super action of 5 super probiotics”, “Fights infections, rectifies imbalance of good and bad bacteria cause by stress, lack of sleep and unhealthy food”, “Improves digestion. Reduces constipation and digestion problems even when you eat fried or spicy food”, “Better metabolism. Reduces fatigue by breaking down complex food easily”, “Stimulate vitamin-B. encourages production of Vitamin-B12, which keeps your nervous system and blood circulation healthy”, “Fights bloating. Healthy bacteria removes toxins, thereby reducing gas and bloating”, and “Benefits of WonderPro are best experienced when consumed daily”, were substantiated. These complaints were NOT UPHELD. The claim, “Boosts Immunity” was considered to be misleading by ambiguity as the data provided showed evidence only on immunity against intestinal disorders and not against general immunity of human body. The advertisement contravened Chapter I.4 of the ASCI Code. This complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Excelus Brands LLp – Kettle Studio"
PRODUCT:"The Grannary Chips"

COMPLAINT:

"1. Presenting can't stop eating whole grain chips 2. Binge Irresponsibly"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

""“The print ad states ""presenting can't stop eating whole grain chips"" and ""Binge Irresponsibly"" Both above statements violate ASCI F&B Ad Guidelines' clause 4) viz Advertisement should not encourage over and excessive consumption"" by promoting over eating”""

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objections raised in the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat which they availed, and subsequently submitted their written response. Advertiser in their response stated that with regards to the usage of the caption ""Can’t stop eating….."" they wanted to project the good taste of the product. Further, the tag line ""Binge Irresponsibly"" was used in comparison with the general snacking categories available in the market. These words signify the goodness of the product in a light-hearted manner. The advertiser further agreed to remove the claims objected to from their advertisements and sought for Informal Resolution of the complaint. However, they did not complete the formalities prior to the due date for the same. Therefore, the complaint was processed for CCC deliberations. Upon carefully viewing the print advertisement, examining the complaint and the response given by the advertiser, the CCC concluded that in the context of an Ad for the product promoted, the claim, “Presenting can't stop eating whole grain chips”, was a generic claim. This complaint was NOT UPHELD. The claim, “Binge Irresponsibly”, contravened Clause 4 of the ASCI Guidelines on Advertising of Food & Beverages (“Advertisements should not encourage over or excessive consumption or show inappropriately large portions of any food or beverage. It should reflect moderation in consumption and show portion sizes appropriate to the occasion or situation.”) This complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Guru Maa Janki Devi"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“Url http://m.rajasthanpatrika.patrika.com/ the ad is misleading. the ad misleads on giving solutions to all problems of life.. and includes foolish things like vashikaran.”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant and forwarded the details of the complaint, verbatim, to the advertiser with a request to respond to the same. The CCC noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the prescribed due date for this complaint. Upon viewing the website advertisement, and in the absence of any response or comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims (in Hindi) related to astrology, providing solutions for various problems, “Solutions by phone call (free astrology consultancy) agar aapka pati, beti ya premi kisi ke vash main ho, shaadi ya vise main deri, sautan ya dushman se chootkara, court case mein jeet, talaak, pyaar mein dhoka, grihkalesh, pati patni mein anban, prem vivaah, contact……” were false, not substantiated and misleading by gross exaggeration. Also, the advertisement exploits the consumers’ lack of knowledge and is likely to lead to grave or widespread disappointment in the minds of consumers. The website advertisement contravened Chapters I.1, I.4 and I.5 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Bennett Coleman & Co Ltd"
PRODUCT:"Times Spark"

COMPLAINT:

“Read to Lead”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"The recent advertisement from Bennett University for their scholarship program- 'Times Spark' uses the caption 'Read To Lead' with The Times Of India. This caption 'READ TO LEAD' has been used by us for our newspaper DB POST and the ads were regularly published in our newspaper Dainik Bhaskar. Request the respected ASCI members to please check and resolve this discrepancy that will hamper brand positioning and differentiation."

Recommendation: NOT UPHELD

"The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant and forwarded the details of the complaint, verbatim, to the advertiser with a request to respond to the same. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat which they did not avail, but submitted their written response. The advertiser had stated in their response that the phrase “Times Spark Read to Lead” is neither a claim nor refers to quality, efficiency and merchantability of any product whatsoever. The phrase ‘Read to Lead’ is used in the descriptive/generic sense of the word, in conjunction with their trademark ‘Times Spark’ to broadly outline the spirit of the scholarship program. They have also applied for the trademark ‘Times Spark Read to Lead’ in class 16, 35, 38, 41 and 45 . The phrase ‘Read to Lead’ is so generic and common that it has been used by multiple parties. Advertiser further argues that ASCI has no jurisdiction qua print media advertisements and has no power to censure newspapers / print media, which are governed and work under the aegis of Press Council of India Act, where a due process exists for addressing all complaints. The CCC viewed the print advertisements of the Complainant, the print advertisement of the advertiser and considered the response given by the advertiser. Regarding the advertisers comment regarding ASCI’s jurisdiction, the CCC referred to the recent judgement by the Hon’ble Supreme Court titled “Common Cause (A Regd Society) v Union of India and Ors”, which affirmed and recognised the self-regulatory mechanism put in place by bodies like ASCI as an effective pre-emptive step to statutory provisions in the sphere of media regulation for TV and Radio programmes in India. The grievance redressal platform provided by self-regulatory bodies, therefore, function as the first step for aggrieved consumers against content in the media which might not be in line with the existing laws. The CCC noted that the phrase “Read to lead” is generic, and the context of use of this generic phrase in the two advertisements are entirely different. The CCC also observed that the words `read to lead’ are commonly used by various parties for various campaigns including Indian Express Newspaper. The CCC concluded that the Advertiser’s advertisement was not in contravention of the ASCI code since the terminology being used is in the public domain and used substantially. The complaint was NOT UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Lucky Mycro Fine Appliances Pvt. Ltd."
PRODUCT:"Mycro Fine Atta Maker"

COMPLAINT:

"Recently I have seen ad of Mycrofine Atta Maker in SANDESH Gujarati News Paper, which in my opinion is improper, dishonest and misguiding. For your ready reference I have forwarded herewith a news paper cutting of said ad of Microfine Atta Maker published in Ahmedabad Main Edition of SANDESH Daily dated 5th August, 2017. I have given here under my observations and also the reasons why in my opinion the said advertisement is dishonest and false 1. In the advertisement the MYCROFINE Atta Maker has claimed that A. The Electric Motor contains Power saver turbo Technology which saves 40% Electricity and B. It contains double action cleaning technology. The above claim of Advertiser needs to be substantiated with Proof. The advertisement is totally illusive, misleading and gives false but rosy communication thereby tempting the buyers for no real fruits. By such an Ad the advertiser tries to prove his superiority over other players in the market and take personal advantage from the illusive impact on the readers/prospective buyers. Such wrong communication may damage the goodwill of other good brands honestly playing in the market. I wonder how this is possible and what miracle this Atta Maker has done with Turbo Technology to save 40% Electricity. I strongly believe that the above communication by way of News Paper advertisement without any substantial proof is totally baseless, misguiding, dishonest and obviously far from the truth. I have brought this to your notice with a hope that you will surely take necessary action in this regard in the larger interest of public. Please keep me also updated regarding the action taken by you in the matter. I would be very much thank full to you if you can kindly share me the justification, if any, that you may receive from the advertiser..”"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant and forwarded the details of the complaint, verbatim, to the advertiser with a request to respond to the same. The CCC noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the prescribed due date for this complaint. The advertiser did not submit any comparative technical data regarding product efficacy or it’s superiority versus other marketed products. Upon viewing the advertisement, and in the absence of any response or comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims (in Gujarati) as translated in English, “The Electric Motor contains Power saver turbo Technology which saves 40% Electricity”, and “It contains double action cleaning technology”, were not substantiated with supporting technical data, and are misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was accordingly UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Bharti Airtel Ltd"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"Request you to advise on my query. Any actions that has been taken against the same by you. Just want to highlight one advertisement related issue with you which I have personally experienced with Airtel India..I think they are doing fake advertisement related to the mobile internet packages.They show something and provide something. I have received a text message from Airtel on 20-July- 17 about a mobile internet package..The message states that if I do a recharge of Rs.499 then I will get the benefit of Unltd calls local+std, 1.25GB data/din , 70din which clearly means that after getting the recharge of 499 done I will get 1.25GB/ din data upto 70 days from the date of recharge(as they used to mention the same wordings for the other pack of Rs. 349 and I get the same as per the wordings) but suddenly my data got stopped working after 10days.. After that when I contacted Airtel customer care team they told me many other things which were not mentioned in the message nor in the site.. They are totaaly doing fake advertisement to attract customers but reality comes out later on.. Need your help to get the solution as I am a victim of this fraudulent with Airtel. Attaching the snapshot of the text message for your reference which I receieved on 20-July-17..Laos. request you go thru the trail chain mail.. Looking forward for your support.”"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: NOT UPHELD

"The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant and forwarded the details of the complaint, verbatim, to the advertiser with a request to respond to the same. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat which they did not avail, but requested for one week’s extension to respond to the complaint. The advertiser was granted an extension of four days to the standard lead time of seven days to submit their reply in response to their request for extension of one week. Subsequently the advertiser submitted their written response. Advertiser in their response stated that due to a system error the SMS was wrongly and inadvertently sent to the customer. As soon as this issue was highlighted in their system, they approached the Customer and resolved the issue. Upon carefully viewing the advertisement – SMS, examining the complaint and the response given by the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim offer regarding data pack “Rs.499 = Unltd Loc + STD call + 1.25 GB/ din, 70 din (Sirf 4G H/S + 4G SIM par)”, was not objectionable as it was qualified with an appropriate disclaimer to enable the customer to avail the said offer. The complaint was accordingly NOT UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Amazon.com, Inc "
PRODUCT:"Parachute advanced coconut hair oil"

COMPLAINT:

“Selling product with MRP. Actual MRP of Product is 135 https://www.amazon.in/dp/B00CBRHK5S/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_apa_i_hStHzb2B6NWY5 ”.

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI had approached the advertiser (Amazon Seller Services) for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant and forwarded the details of the complaint, verbatim, to the advertiser with a request to respond to the same. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat which they did not avail, but submitted their written response. The advertiser had stated in their response that the product, the MRP, the Offer Price and the product description are listed by the independent seller directly and Amazon has no direct control over the particulars of the listing. Upon enquiry from the reseller, Amazon has been informed that the reseller has three stocks of the same product in its inventory: the first batch was priced at Rs. 135; the second batch for which the MRP was increased to Rs. 149; and the third and most recent batch is priced at Rs. 135. Since the product was priced at Rs. 149 when the product was purchased, the advertisement on Amazon reflected the same. However, since the products from the inventory included from both batches, the customer received a product with a lower price. To ensure that the customer does not end up paying more than the MRP, the reseller applied a promotion granting discount of Rs.15. The CCC noted that the complainant has seen the product advertisement offering discount on the Amazon website and the transaction for purchase also has taken place between the complainant and Amazon. Amazon did not provide any evidence to prove that the product price was Rs.149/- at the time of purchase by the consumer whereas the Complainant provided evidence of the actual product price being Rs. 135/- (batch no. JP – 314, mfg date 03/2017). Upon carefully viewing the website advertisement, examining the complaint, the response given by the advertiser, and based on the evidence provided by the complainant, the CCC concluded that the website communication claiming the MRP of the product as Rs.149 was false. The advertisement offering at the discounted price of Rs.142, when the actual MRP of the product is Rs.135, distorts facts and is therefore misleading the consumers as to the actual discount being offered. The Website communication contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY: "Chandra Study Circle"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“State No.1 Faculty.”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

"ASCI approached the concerned Media (Eenadu) for their assistance in providing the contact details of the advertiser, or to forward the complaint to the advertiser. The CCC noted that no response was received from the advertiser or from the concerned media entity prior to the prescribed due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and in the absence of any response from the concerned media entity, or comments from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “State No.1 Faculty”, was not substantiated with any verifiable comparative data of the advertiser’s institute and other similar institutes, or any third party validation; and was misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened the Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "SBS Biotech Ayurvedic Division"
PRODUCT:"Roop Mantra Skin Care Products"

COMPLAINT:

"1. face will be bright and skin also will be tight. 2. Use for 3 weeks see the results"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objections raised in the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat which they did not avail, but submitted their written response. The advertiser had stated in their response that the claim made in the advertisement is fully supported and substantiated with concrete evidence that it contains 12 herbs. As per the experience and feed back of the consumer it is inferred that Roop Manta cream gives useful result in three weeks. Advertiser did not submit the product sample, Product Approval License from Regulatory Authority, and product composition details. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. The CCC noted that the advertiser only makes assertions regarding the product benefits however, did not provide any evidence of product efficacy for improvement in complexion nor any skin tightening / anti-aging benefits. The CCC concluded that the claims, “face will be bright and skin also will be tight”, and “Use for 3 weeks see the results”, were not substantiated with product efficacy data, and are misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Rajnish Hot Deals Pvt. Ltd"
PRODUCT:"Kasaav Dusting Powder"

COMPLAINT:

"1. 100% Effective from first day 2. Gives new vigour and excitement in 15 days and awakens youth feeling"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objections raised in the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat which they availed and submitted their written response. The advertiser had stated in their response that the said substantiation is taken from Ancient Ayurvedic Granthas viz. Bhavprakash, Vagbhat. They have used certain herbs which are stated in Ayurvedic granthas which has benefits related to female genitals. Upon carefully viewing the print advertisement, examining the complaint and the response given by the advertiser, the CCC noted that the advertiser only makes assertions regarding the product benefit of vaginal tightening however, did not provide any evidence of product efficacy. In the absence of claim support data, the CCC concluded that that claims, “100% Effective from first day”, and “Gives new vigour and excitement in 15 days and awakens youth feeling”, were not substantiated with product efficacy data, and are misleading by exaggeration. The CCC referred to the website quoted in the advertisement www.kasaav.com which has the claims regarding tightening and rejuvenation of vagina and related impact on marital life. These claims imply that the product is meant for enhancement of sexual pleasure, which is in Breach of the law as it violated The Drugs & Magic Remedies Act. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1, I.4 and III.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Olivia Health Care"
PRODUCT:"Olivia Herb Bleach"

COMPLAINT:

"1. Enriched with Haldi, Chandan, Nimbu and AloeVera 2. No Burning 3. No itching 4. No redness 5. No long hours of waiting 6. Dermatologically tested"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

""Our Objection: 1) As the name of the product is Olivia Herb Bleach, are all ingredients in the bleach herbal? 2) How does it do the bleaching activity? 3) Which ingredients in the product are responsible for bleaching? 4) How much amount of Haldi, Chandan, Nimbu and AloeVera is present in the product to make a significant impact on skin? 5) Claims 2-5 need to be substantiated with independent scientific reports. 6) Claim Dermatologically tested should be substantiated with independent Test report According to us, the advertisement contravenes Chapter 1.1 and 1.4 of ASCI code Action to be taken: We propose that the advertisement should be immediately withdrawn.""

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant and forwarded the details of the complaint, verbatim, to the advertiser with a request to respond to the same. The CCC noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the prescribed due date for this complaint. Upon viewing the advertisement, and in the absence of any response or comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “Enriched with Haldi, Chandan, Nimbu and AloeVera”, was not substantiated with supporting data showing presence of these ingredients in the product. Claim, “Dermatologically tested”, “No Burning”, “No itching”, “No redness”, and “No long hours of waiting” were not substantiated with any test reports. These claims are misleading by ambiguity and implication that the bleach is herbal, acts faster than other bleaches and the ingredients prevent any harsh effects. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Goodlife Wellness"
PRODUCT:"Slim at home"

COMPLAINT:

"1. Lose weight 2. Professional consultancy at your doorstep 3. 100% guarantee 4. Through Naturopathy grains 5. Naturopathy is most safe and effective. 6. Good life Weight loss plan is 100% slim at home program 7. Weight loss without any medicine, machine and exercise 8. Dieting is not required 9. Routine food can also be eaten 10. Lose 10 kgs till 17 August 2017 and 20 kgs till 12 October 2017 11. Hormonal weight loss plan: Hypothyroid PCOD, Water Retention, Teenage girls plan"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"1. All claims needs to be substantiated with data from independent scientific studies. 2. Consultancy will be given by which professionals? Are they certified? 3. What are Naturopathy grains? Are they certified by an independent agency? Who supplies this grain? 4. What does naturopathy treatment include? 5. How can one lose weight without any exercise, medicine or machine and having routine diet? 6. What happens when one stops taking the treatment? 7. Upto what age can the treatment be taken? 8. Has the results been confirmed by an Independent Agency? 9. How long does the effect lasts? What conditions are required for this? 10. Is the treatment safe for all patients? Does one require to take it under doctor’s supervision? 11. What is meant by hormonal weight loss plan, Hypothyroid PCOD, Water retention and teenage girls plan? Has the performance and safety of these plans certified by studies from any independent agency? According to us, the advertisement contravenes Chapter 1.1 and 1.4 of ASCI code.”"

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant and forwarded the details of the complaint, verbatim, to the advertiser with a request to respond to the same. The CCC noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the prescribed due date for this complaint. Advertiser did not provide details of the treatment procedure for weight reduction. Upon viewing the advertisement, and in the absence of any response or comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims (in Gujarati) as translated in English, “Professional consultancy at your doorstep” , “Lose weight”, “100% guarantee”, “Through Naturopathy grains”, “Naturopathy is most safe and effective”, “Good life Weight loss plan is 100% slim at home program”, “Weight loss without any medicine, machine and exercise”, “Dieting is not required”, “Routine food can also be eaten”, “Lose 10 kgs till 17 August 2017 and 20 kgs till 12 October 2017”, “Hormonal weight loss plan: Hypothyroid PCOD, Water Retention, Teenage girls plan”, were not substantiated with supporting clinical evidence, and with treatment efficacy data, and are misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Hindustan Unilever Ltd"
PRODUCT:"Fair and lovely Anti Marks Treatment"

COMPLAINT:

"1. 100 % marks reduced. 2. Visible reduction of 100% marks in Clinical. 3. Individual results may vary. 4. Apply twice a day for best effect."

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

""1. Claims 1 and 2 talk about results from test. Was the test done by an independent laboratory? Was the sample size representative and statistically valid? Details about the test conducted need to be examined. 2. What is the percentage of variation in results? 3. How long does it take for the desired results? 4. Does the product have necessary approval from the concerned regulatory authorities? 5. Claims 1& 2 need to be substantiated with independent reports. 6. As per the ASCI Guidelines for Celebrities in Advertising, a Celebrity should do due diligence to ensure that all description, claims and comparisons made in the advertisements they appear in or endorse are capable of being objectively ascertained and capable of substantiation and should not mislead or appear deceptive. The claims made by the celebrity (Yami Gautam) in this advt violate this clause of the ASCI guidelines. According to us, the advertisement contravenes Chapter 1.1 and 1.4 of ASCI code""

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant and forwarded the details of the complaint, verbatim, to the advertiser with a request to respond to the same. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat which they did not avail, but submitted their written response. The advertiser had stated in their response that “100% marks reduced” is the only claim in the advertisement, which is supported by a disclaimer “Visible reduction of 100% of marks tested in clinical. Individual results may vary. Apply twice a day for best effect”, and these statements are not claims in themselves. The claim, “100% marks reduced” is supported by a clinical study conducted by an independent third party. The study was a two-celled, randomised, double blind, complete block design, half face study for the time period of 8 weeks of Product use. In the study conducted, total number of spots evaluated among 44 subjects were 132. At the end of week 8, all the 132 spots showed reduction. Thus, proving and justifying the claim of “100% marks reduced”. In line with this study design, the disclaimer clearly captures the test methodology and recommendation of 2 times a day usage to achieve optimum results. As claim support data, the advertiser provided copy of clinical study results along with endorsement by a dermatologist, certificate for endorsement of clinical study by a CRO and Letter issued by Consultant Statistician confirming the adequacy of the sample size of the study, and FDA license of the product. The claim support data submitted by the advertiser was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC carefully examined the complaint, the print advertisement and the detailed response sent by the advertiser as well as the opinion of Technical expert presented at the meeting. The CCC observed that the clinical study supports the claims of “100 % marks reduced”, However, one of the pre-requisites of the study is that the subjects are required to avoid exposure to sun in excess of 30 minutes. In absence of such disclaimer, the advertisement was considered to be misleading by omission. The CCC also noted that the disclaimers in the advertisement are not clearly legible and not in compliance with the ASCI Guidelines for Disclaimers. The CCC noted that a celebrity (Yami Gautam) appears in the advertisement. The advertisement contravened Chapter I.4 of the ASCI Code and Clause VII (ii) of the ASCI Guidelines for Disclaimers. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Wellness Water Point and Gas Services"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"1. Product name is Alkaline Water. 2. First time in India. 3. Change Water and increase Life expectancy. 4. Intake Alkaline water and avoid illness. 5. According to great Scientists and Doctors; drinking water from various filters and R.O. leads to greater harm as compared to benefit as all types of water are acidic. 6. 90% of diseases in our body are caused due to water only. 7. Advantages of drinking Alkaline water: Migraine can be removed (treated), thyroid can be removed (treated), Cardiopulmonary pain is removed, Relief in Food allergy, Relief from Heart problems, despair can be removed, Advantage in diabetes, Obesity is removed, advantage in blood pressure, memory power increases, one can have complete sleep, Asthama can be removed, Swelling and bile can be removed, Gout can be removed, skin diseases can be removed, T.B. can be removed, stone can be removed. 8. Live demo of Alkaline water. 9. Alkaline water products are made up of Korean Bioceramic Technology. 10. The quality of Alkaline water is certified by World’s famous organization such as- NSF, FDA, KFDA."

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"1. Claims 1 to 10 needs to be substantiated with independent research data and certified by competent authority. 2. How does the company claim that this quality of water is available for the first time in India? Is there any independent research data to prove this? 3. How can change in water increase the life expectancy? What sort of guarantee is given? How long can one live after having Alkaline water? 4. Can a consumer who takes Alkaline water be safe from all types of illness? Is there any independent report which indicates so? 5. Which scientists and Doctors have said that, water is acidic and drinking water of various filters and R.O. can cause harm? Please give details. What type of harm and benefit is related with drinking Alkaline water? Citations of scientific studies need to be mentioned 6. How can it be said that 90% of diseases in our body are caused due to water? Has it been certified by an independent body? Citations to be provided. 7. Ref. claim 7: How can one get rid off all the mentioned diseases/problems by just drinking Alkaline water? Is there any report by an independent agency or medical experts? 8. What is shown in live demos? How are the benefits shown in live demos? Explain. 9. What is meant by Korean Bioceramic Technology? Reports from independent agencies needs to be provided. 10. The details of all certificated citations mentioned in claim 10 need to be provided. According to us, the Advertisement contravenes chapters 1.1 , 1.2, 1.4 and 1.5 of ASCI code.Action we propose - This advt should be immediately withdrawn”"

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant and forwarded the details of the complaint, verbatim, to the advertiser with a request to respond to the same. The CCC noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the prescribed due date for this complaint. Upon viewing the advertisement – pamphlet, and in the absence of any response or comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims (in Gujarati) as translated in English, “Product name is Alkaline Water.”, “First time in India”, “Change Water and increase Life expectancy”, “Intake Alkaline water and avoid illness”, “According to great Scientists and Doctors; drinking water from various filters and R.O. leads to greater harm as compared to benefit as all types of water are acidic”, “90% of diseases in our body are caused due to water only”, “Advantages of drinking Alkaline water: Migraine can be removed (treated), thyroid can be removed (treated), Cardiopulmonary pain is removed, Relief in Food allergy, Relief from Heart problems, despair can be removed, Advantage in diabetes, Obesity is removed, advantage in blood pressure, memory power increases, one can have complete sleep, Asthama can be removed, Swelling and bile can be removed, Gout can be removed, skin diseases can be removed, T.B. can be removed, stone can be removed”, “Live demo of Alkaline water”, “Alkaline water products are made up of Korean Bioceramic Technology”, and “The quality of Alkaline water is certified by World’s famous organization such as- NSF, FDA, KFDA”, were not substantiated with any supporting evidence, and are misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement – pamphlet contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Sheth Brothers"
PRODUCT:"Komla Gutika"

COMPLAINT:

"1. The beauty of the Indian women was - Symmetric Body and Slim waist. 2. For both women and men. 3. Komala Gutika helps to make body symmetric which has been shapeless for Women’s bloating abdomen after pregnancy, sedentary life of men and women and intake of junk food by youngsters. 4. Stay fit and slim by Komala Gutika. 5. An outstanding product by manufacturers of Kayam chauran; Sheth Brothers."

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"1. All claims 1 to 5 need to be substantiated with data from independent scientific studies. 2. 2. What is the base for saying that beauty of the women was symmetric body and slim waist only? Could the beauty of women be measured by only these two things? – violates chapter 1.5 and chapter 2 of ASCI code. 3. Independent studies need to be provided by the advertiser as to how one tablet helps a women to remove bloated abdomen after pregnancy, weight gained by men and women due to sedentary life and shapeless body of youngsters due to intake of junk food? 4. Can a person stay fit and slim by only taking Komala Gutika? 5. How can it be claimed that it is an outstanding product by Sheth Brothers making Kayam Churan? Has the performance and safety of these products certified by studies from any independent agency? According to us, the advertisement contravenes Chapter 1.1 and 1.4 of ASCI code. Action to be taken: We propose that the advertisement should be immediately withdrawn.”"

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant and forwarded the details of the complaint, verbatim, to the advertiser with a request to respond to the same. The CCC noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the prescribed due date for this complaint. Upon viewing the advertisement, and in the absence of any response or comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims (in Gujarati) as translated in English, “For both women and men”, “Komala Gutika helps to make body symmetric which has been shapeless for Women’s bloating abdomen after pregnancy, sedentary life of men and women and intake of junk food by youngsters”, and “Stay fit and slim by Komala Gutika”, were not substantiated with product efficacy data, and are misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. This complaint was UPHELD. The claims, “The beauty of the Indian women was - Symmetric Body and Slim waist”, and “An outstanding product by manufacturers of Kayam chauran; Sheth Brothers”, were not considered to be objectionable. This complaint was NOT UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Agro Global Resources P. Ltd"
PRODUCT:"Wagga Wagga Diabetes Care"

COMPLAINT:

"“I have purchased an edible oil named - Wagga Wagga Canola Oil with following label claims Helps control Blood sugar Diabetes Care Oil. Please find attached photographs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KgorIqiYOto It seems that misleading claims has been made in this product with an intention to misguide customer and to obtain some unholy profit. Seeking your kind intervention on this product subjected validity of its health claim.”"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant and forwarded the details of the complaint, verbatim, to the advertiser with a request to respond to the same. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat which they availed, and submitted their written response. The advertiser had stated in their response that the advertisement complained against is not the final version of the advertisement run by them. The advertisement under scrutiny is uploaded by unauthorised third party, unrelated to the advertiser and that action has been initiated by them to remove the said advertisement. However, the CCC noted that the YouTube video was still available. They further stated that Wagga Wagga Diabetes Care oil is a 100% Canola oil made from non GMO seeds. Canola oil has a high percentage of Monounsaturated fatty acids (MUFA), which in normal parlance are termed as “good fats”. The said claim is based upon proven effectiveness of Canola oil on diabetics due to its high percentage of MUFA. Diabetes Care contains 65 68% MUFA and one of the lowest level of saturated bad fats. With high MUFA, lowest saturated fat, high Omega-3, zero cholesterol, negligible trans-fat, no harmful erucic acid and high Vitamin E, canola oil is the oil of choice for health conscious individuals and particularly recommended for diabetics. Out of the several substantiated health benefits, the product in question only makes the health claim specific to diabetes care. But as reflected in the studies/ research appended with the response, Canola oil has several other health benefits, which makes it an ideal cooking oil for health conscious individuals, even if they are non-diabetics. Neither the advertisement nor the label suggest that the diabetes can be prevented or cured merely by using this product. The claim is that it “helps control diabetes” and is “diabetes care oil”. As claim support data, the advertiser provided copy of product packaging, product approval license, copy of WHO report, Copy of the lab report regarding product composition, Copy of report titled “Glycaemic Control among individuals with self reported diabetes in India” by Madras Diabetes Research Foundation & Dr. Mohan’s Diabetes Specialities Centre, Chennai, Article published in Internal Journal of Nutrition titled `Monounsaturated Fatty Acids for CVD and Diabetes: a healthy choice’, and Journal references on list of studies corresponding to several health benefits of Canola oil. The claim support data submitted by the advertiser was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC carefully examined the complaint, the TVC provided by the advertiser as well as advertisement available on the advertiser’s YouTube channel, the product packaging and the detailed response sent by the advertiser as well as the opinion of Technical expert presented at the meeting. The CCC was of the opinion that no single food item can help control blood sugar. Blood sugar control is a function of an individualized treatment programme which includes oral hypoglycaemic agents, insulin, exercise, medical nutrition therapy. The CCC referred to an earlier assessment made by the FSSAI Scientific Panel on Oils and Fats which states that the diet consists of proteins, carbohydrates, fats and micronutrients, it is not advisable to link diabetes control by any single component of diet. Diet counselling for individual with diabetes must be done by professional dietician or physician in a holistic manner and not in isolation of any one particular food ingredient such as oil. Several of the research papers cited and submitted by the advertiser were not directly relevant to the claims being made in the advertisement. Specific to the research paper quoted on the packaging material by the advertiser, the CCC made the following observations – The advertiser has printed the following on the product pack: “As published in the journal* of the American Diabetes Association, canola oil helps maintain the body’s insulin level &reduces the chances of diabetes – related health problems. With its high MUFA & omega 3 content, canola oil reduces the glycemic load of your meal, enabling a gradual release of blood sugar, instead of a sudden spike. *Diabetes Care, July 2014, lead researcher & corresponding author, David J.A. Jenkins.” Content from the research paper which is cited on the product pack emphasizes that the advertiser has made misleading and false claims based on the results of the study. The authors tested the effect of a commonly used oil, canola oil, containing both ALA (9.1%) and MUFA (63%) when used as part of a low–glycemic index (GI) diet. This dietary intervention was compared with a high-whole- grain– cereal diet. The study followed a randomized, parallel design with two treatment arms of 3 months duration as follows: 1) a low-GL diet with a canola oil–enriched bread provided as a supplement (test), and 2) a high wheat-fiber diet emphasizing whole wheat foods (control). Dietary advice on the test diet emphasized low-GI foods which was not the case with the control group. By design, the test diet resulted in significantly greater increases in MUFA and ALA intake and corresponding lower carbohydrate intake, and hence GL, relative to the control diet. At the end of the study the authors have concluded that: “Increased MUFA and ALA (canola oil) consumption as part of a canola low-GL diet modestly lowered HbA1c but to a clinically significant extent in participants with raised blood pressure. Together with the reduction in Framingham risk score, these data support the use of canola oil in type 2 diabetes”. The authors do not conclude that Canola oil helps control blood sugar. They only state that their data supports the use of Canola oil in type 2 diabetes. The CCC observed that the claim as quoted in the disclaimer, “…..Canola oil helps maintain the body’s insulin level” is false as the researchers did not measure insulin levels in the study subjects and is no reference to insulin levels in this article. For the study quoted by the advertiser by Dr Anoop Misra, the CCC noted that the authors hypothesized that the dietary intervention with either canola oil or olive pomace oil would be effective in improving fatty liver in NAFLD subjects compared with other refined oils commonly used in India. In conclusion, the results of this 6-month randomized intervention trial provide evidence that use of olive and canola oils (rich in MUFAs and having a balanced n-6/n-3 PUFAs ratio) as a cooking medium resulted in a significant reduction in fatty liver severity and liver span in NAFLD. Improvement of fatty liver was accompanied by amelioration in insulin resistance and dyslipidemia. All together, these beneficial changes may also decrease the risk for developing type 2 diabetes mellitus and cardiovascular disease in Asian Indians predisposed to develop these diseases. Subjects with Type 2 Diabetes were not included in the study. The study was not designed to test the effect of the oils on glycemic control. Therefore the results of this study do not support the claim that Canola oil helps control blood sugar. For the study by Jeannie Tay, the CCC had the following observations - This study compared the effects of a hypocaloric Low Carbohydrate (LC), high–unsaturated/low–saturated fat diet with those of an energy-matched High Carbohydrate (HC) diet, as part of a holistic lifestyle modification program, on glycemic control, including Glycemic Variability and CVD risk factors in T2DM. This study shows that both Low Carbohydrate (LC) and High Carbohydrate (HC) diets incorporated as part of a lifestyle modification weight loss program achieve significant improvements in glycemic control and cardiovascular risk markers in overweight and obese adults with T2DM. However, the greatest improvements were achieved following the LC diet. This suggests an LC diet with high unsaturated and low saturated fat may confer advantageous therapeutic potential for T2DM management. Further research is required to establish the longer-term effects. The authors were not testing the effect of canola oil on glycemic control. The authors do not conclude that Canola oil helps control blood sugar. It is therefore incorrect to conclude/interpret that the study results show that Canola oil helps control blood sugar. The CCC further observed that no international regulatory body has permitted a claim for Canola oil and blood sugar control. Based on this data, the CCC concluded that the packaging claims, “Diabetes Care”, “Helps control blood sugar”, and the TVC claims “Ab Diabetes se kya darna sugar control karna hai toh oil badal kar dekho”, “Diabetes Care”, and “The Australian that helps control blood sugar”, were inadequately substantiated. The claims refer to a serious disease, namely diabetes and it’s biomarker, namely blood sugar and insulin level. The claim “Ab Diabetes se kya darna sugar control karna hai toh oil badal kar dekho”, imply that Wagga Wagga oil has therapeutic properties and these may influence the diabetic patients / consumers to believe that by consuming the advertised product, one can overcome the problem of diabetic complications. The product packaging and the TVC, YouTube advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code as well as Clause 2 of the Guidelines on Advertising of Foods and Beverages. This complaint was UPHELD. The disclaimers in the TVC are not in the same language as the audio of the TVC (Hindi) and contravened Clause 4(I) of ASCI Guidelines for Disclaimers. This complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "G. D. Foods MFG. (India) Pvt. Ltd"
PRODUCT:"Tops Strawberry Jam"

COMPLAINT:

"The advertisement claims - ""Health Secrets of Strawberry Jam: I. Intake of strawberry jam helps in improving the health of hair, skin and fingernails. II. Jam is rich in energy and fiber, which is enough to boost your day. III. Various other vitamins and minerals are also present that keep you healthy."" The website also depicts a pack shot of the Product and it can be seen that the Advertiser is making a claim of ""Fruity and Healthy"" on pack of the Product. Further, the websites shows a pack shot of the Product claiming the same to be ""Exotic Jam"". The said Advertisement and On-Pack Claim is unsubstantiated, unsupported and uncorroborated which is likely to mislead the consumer. The Advertiser is giving the benefits of Strawberry Jam. However, it is submitted that Strawberry Jam is extremely high on sugar. The Advertiser itself has declared nutrition values on back of pack of the Product and also on the website. It may be noted that amongst other nutrients, the 100 g of the Product contains 68 g of sugar! Accordingly, the Product cannot be considered ""healthy"" or ""ideal for a full day boost"" by itself. The Advertiser has not explained how consumption of strawberry jam helps in improving the health of hair, skin and fingernails. The Advertiser has not given any serving suggestion, manner of consumption of Strawberry Jam to suggest how Strawberry Jam may be considered healthy. The Advertiser has not substantiated as to how, in what manner, and to what extent Strawberry Jam is healthy and ideal for a full day boost, and helps in improving the health of hair, skin and fingernails. While fruits are very good source of several vitamins, minerals, phytonutrients and dietary fiber, all of which are essential for good health, jam manufacturing process involves high heat which destroys the inherent micronutrients present in the jam. Hence nutrient content and function claim cannot be substantiated in a category like Jam unless the manufacturer has fortified the product. The claim, ""Intake of strawberry jam helps in improving the health of hair, skin and fingernails"" is a product Linked claim rather than established nutrient/ ingredient function, for which research publication/ clinical data is needed. Moreover, if a health claim is made, the Advertiser should declare the nutrient content as a part of the back of pack nutrition information (as per FSSAI guidelines], which is absent in Tops. Hence, a sweeping statement as made by the Advertiser on its website and on pack, without any substantiation whatsoever is misleading and wrongful on part of the Advertiser. Further, The Advertiser is claiming on its pack that its Product is ""exotic"". However, the List of ingredients as mentioned on the said website Lists out strawberry as the fruit that has been purportedly added to the Product by the Advertiser. Strawberry is quite commonly found in India and has been in consumption traditionally. The Advertiser has not substantiated as to how and in what manner Strawberry Jam made with strawberry may be considered ""exotic"". The Advertiser has wrongfully made an unsubstantiated, unsupported and uncorroborated claim of ""exotic"" with respect to strawberry which is commonly grown/found in India and has been consumed in India traditionally. It is submitted that the Advertiser is claiming that Strawberry Jam is healthy and is ideal for a full day boost and helps in improving the health of hair, skin and fingernails. Such exaggerated, unsubstantiated, and unfounded claims are likely to mislead the consumers into believing that Tops Strawberry Jam is beneficial for health. It is pertinent to note that the Advertisement is misleading and deceptive. The Advertisement states that the Product has certain health benefits like being ideal for a full day boost, improving the health of hair, skin and fingernails etc. The consumers are likely to purchase the Product assuming the stated health benefits which are not proven and are baseless and unsubstantiated. It is submitted that the alleged health benefits of the Product are health/nutritional claims as the consumer is led to believe that regular consumption of the Product will help in staying healthy and getting a full day boost. Moreover, the claim that the product is ""Exotic"" is misleading and deceptive, Consumers are likely to purchase the Product assuming certain qualities/health benefits of consuming the Product as ""exotic"", whereas actually the Product is made with fruit native to/grown commonly in India."

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant and forwarded the details of the complaint, verbatim, to the advertiser with a request to respond to the same. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser had, however, not responded to ASCI’s request. The CCC noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the prescribed due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the website advertisement and in the absence of any comments or response from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims, "Health Secrets of Strawberry Jam: Intake of strawberry jam helps in improving the health of hair, skin and fingernails. Jam is rich in energy and fiber, which is enough to boost your day. Various other vitamins and minerals are also present that keep you healthy”, and pack shot of the Product claiming, "Fruity and Healthy" and "Exotic Jam", were not substantiated with evidence of product efficacy, and are misleading by exaggeration. The website advertisement and the product packaging contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "G. D. Foods MFG. (India) Pvt. Ltd"
PRODUCT:"Tops Pineapple Jam"

COMPLAINT:

"""Health Secrets of Pineapple Jam: I. It is a great source of energy and fiber, thus ideal for a full-day boost. ii. This jam made with pineapple is rich in calcium and Vitamin C, iii. Various other vitamins and minerals help you to stay healthy. "" The website also depicts a pack shot of the Product and it can be seen that the Advertiser is making a claim of ""Fruity and Healthy"" on pack of the Product. Further, the websites shows a pack shot of the Product claiming the same to be ""Exotic Jam"". The said Advertisement and On-Pack Claim is unsubstantiated, unsupported and uncorroborated which is likely to mislead the consumer. The Advertiser is giving the benefits of Pineapple Jam. However, it is submitted that Pineapple Jam is extremely high on sugar. The Advertiser itself has declared nutrition values on back of pack of the Product and also on the website. It may be noted that amongst other nutrients, 100 g of the Product contains 68 g of sugar! Accordingly, the Product cannot be considered ""healthy"" or ""ideal for a full day boost"" by itself. The Advertiser has not given any serving suggestion, manner of consumption of Pineapple Jam to suggest how Pineapple Jam may be considered healthy. The Advertiser has not substantiated as to how, in what manner, and to what extent Pineapple Jam is healthy and ideal for a full day boost. Moreover, for making a source of fiber claim, the product needs to deliver 3% fiber (3 g/ 100 g) {reference CODEX, FSSAI Draft guidelines on Labeling & Claims}. Since jam typically contains 0.4 to 1 g fiber per 100 g, a source of fiber claim cannot be substantiated. Moreover, if a health claim is made, the Advertiser should declare the nutrient content as a part of the back of pack nutrition information (as per FSSAI guidelines), which is absent in Tops. While fruits are very good source of several vitamins, minerals, phytonutrients and dietary fiber, all of which are essential for good health, jam manufacturing process involves high heat which destroys the inherent micronutrients present in the jam, A typical jam processing with leave no Vitamin C in the end product. For making a ""rich in"" claim, the product needs to deliver 30% RDA per 100 g product. Approx. 20 mg calcium is present in 100 g raw pineapple (Reference: Fruits by NIN), which works out to only 3% RDA (Calcium reference value 600 mg/ dl. Tops pineapple jam contains only 50 pineapple pulp, hence a claim on calcium cannot be substantiated. Nutrient content and function claim cannot be substantiated in a category like Jam unless the Advertiser has fortified the product. Hence, a sweeping statement as made by the Advertiser on its website and on pack, without any substantiation whatsoever is misleading and wrongful on part of the Advertiser. Further, The Advertiser is claiming on its pack that its Product is ""exotic"". However, the list of ingredients as mentioned on the said website lists out the fruit that has been purportedly added to the Product by the Advertiser. Pineapple is quite commonly found in India and have been in consumption traditionally. The Advertiser has not substantiated as to how and in what manner Pineapple Jam made with Pineapple may be considered ""exotic"". The Advertiser has wrongfully made an unsubstantiated, unsupported and uncorroborated claim of ""exotic"" with respect to fruit that are commonly grown/found in India and have been consumed in India traditionally. It is submitted that the Advertiser is claiming that Pineapple Jam is healthy and is ideal for a full day boost. Such exaggerated, unsubstantiated, and unfounded claims are likely to mislead the consumers into believing that Tops Pineapple Jam is beneficial for health. It is pertinent to note that the Advertisement is misleading and deceptive. The Advertisement states that the Product has certain health benefits like being ideal for a full day boost etc. The consumers are likely to purchase the Product assuming the stated health benefits, which are not proven, baseless and unsubstantiated. It is submitted that the alleged health benefits of the Product are health/nutritional claims as the consumer is led to believe that regular consumption of the Product will help in staying healthy and getting a full day boost. Moreover, the claim that the product is ""Exotic"" is misleading and deceptive. Consumers are likely to purchase the Product assuming certain qualities/health benefits of consuming the Product as ""exotic"", whereas actually the Product is made with fruits native to/grown commonly in India.”"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant and forwarded the details of the complaint, verbatim, to the advertiser with a request to respond to the same. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser had, however, not responded to ASCI’s request. The CCC noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the prescribed due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the website advertisement and in the absence of any comments or response from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims, "Health Secrets of Pineapple Jam: It is a great source of energy and fiber, thus ideal for a full-day boost. This jam made with pineapple is rich in calcium and Vitamin C. Various other vitamins and minerals help you to stay healthy”, and pack shot of the Product claiming, "Fruity and Healthy" and "Exotic Jam", were not substantiated with evidence of product efficacy, and are misleading by exaggeration. The website advertisement and the product packaging contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "G. D. Foods MFG. (India) Pvt. Ltd"
PRODUCT:"Tops Orange Marmalade"

COMPLAINT:

"“""The advertisement claims - ""'Health Secrets of Jams: • Get a full day boost, as it's a rich source of energy and fiber. • This jam comes with the goodness of orange, which is rich in Vitamin C. • Various other vitamins and minerals are also present that keep your body and mind healthy"". The said Advertisement is unsubstantiated, unsupported and uncorroborated health and nutrition claims which are likely to mislead the consumer. The Advertiser is giving the benefits of Orange Marmalade. However, it is submitted that there are no conclusive studies to prove that Marmalade is rich source of energy and fiber and also Vitamin C. The Advertiser has not substantiated as to how, in what manner, and to what extent Orange Marmalade provides energy, fiber and Vitamin C. It may be noted that for making a source of fiber claim, the product needs to deliver 3% fiber [3 g/100 g) {reference CODEX, FSSAI Draft guidelines on Labeling & Claims}. Since jam typically contains 0.4 to 1 g fiber per 100 g, a source of fiber claim cannot be substantiated. Moreover, if a health claim is made, the Advertiser should declare the nutrient content as a part of the back of pack nutrition information [as per FSSAI guidelines], which is absent in Tops. Moreover, while fruits are very good sources of several vitamins, minerals, phytonutrients and dietary fiber, all of which are essential for good health, marmalade/jam manufacturing process involves high heat which destroys the inherent micronutrients present in the marmalade/jam. A typical marmalade/jam processing with leave no Vitamin C in the end product. Hence nutrient content and function claim cannot be substantiated in a category like marmalade/ Jam unless the Advertiser has fortified the Product. None of the above criteria for making a health claim is being met by the Advertiser. Hence, a sweeping statement as made by the Advertiser on its website and on pack, without any substantiation whatsoever is misleading and wrongful on part of the Advertiser. It is submitted that the Advertiser is claiming that Orange Marmalade has benefits like good source of energy, fiber and Vitamin C etc. Such exaggerated, unsubstantiated, and unfounded claims are likely to mislead the consumers into believing that Tops Orange Marmalade is beneficial for health. It is pertinent to note that the Advertisement is misleading and deceptive. The Advertisement states that the Product has certain health benefits like good source of energy, fiber and Vitamin C etc. The consumers are likely to purchase the Product assuming the stated health benefits, which are not proven, baseless and unsubstantiated. It is submitted that the alleged health benefits of the Product are health/nutritional claims as the consumer is led to believe that regular consumption of the Product will help in getting energy, fiber and Vitamin C along with other nutrients.”"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant and forwarded the details of the complaint, verbatim, to the advertiser with a request to respond to the same. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser had, however, not responded to ASCI’s request. The CCC noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the prescribed due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the website advertisement and in the absence of any comments or response from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims, "Health Secrets of Pineapple Jam: It is a great source of energy and fiber, thus ideal for a full-day boost. This jam made with pineapple is rich in calcium and Vitamin C. Various other vitamins and minerals help you to stay healthy”, and pack shot of the Product claiming, "Fruity and Healthy" and "Exotic Jam", were not substantiated with evidence of product efficacy, and are misleading by exaggeration. The website advertisement and the product packaging contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "G. D. Foods MFG. (India) Pvt. Ltd"
PRODUCT:"Tops Mango Jam"

COMPLAINT:

"“The advertisement claims - ""Health Secrets of Mango Jam: i. A great source of energy and fiber that gives you a full-day boost. ii. This mango jam is rich in vitamins and nutrients, thus, aid in digestion and boosts immune system. iii. Packed with antioxidants that help in fighting cancers. iv. Various other vitamins and minerals that keep your body and mind healthy."". The website also depicts a pack shot of the Product and it can be seen that the Advertiser is making a claim of "" Fruity and Healthy"" on pack of the Product. Further, the websites shows a pack shot of the Product claiming the same to be ""Exotic Jam"". The said Advertisement and On-Pack Claim is unsubstantiated, unsupported and uncorroborated which is likely to mislead the consumer. The Advertiser is giving the benefits of Mango Jam. However, it is submitted that Mango Jam, is high on sugar. The Advertiser itself has declared nutrition values on back of pack of the Product and also on the website. It may be noted that amongst other nutrients, the 100 g of the Product contains 68 g of sugar! Accordingly, the Product cannot be considered “healthy"" or ""ideal for a full day boost"" by itself. The Advertiser has not explained how consumption of Mango Jam aids in digestion and boosts immune system. The Advertiser has not substantiated how Mango Jam helps in fighting cancers. The Advertiser has not given any serving suggestion, manner of consumption of Mango Jam to suggest how Mango Jam may be considered healthy. The Advertiser has not substantiated as to how, in what manner, and to what extent Mango Jam is healthy and ideal for a full day boost, aids digestion, boosts immune system or helps fight cancers. It may be noted that for making a source of fiber claim, the Product needs to deliver 3% fiber [3 g/ 100 g] {reference CODEX, FSSAI Draft guidelines on Labeling & Claims} , Since jam typically contains 0.4 to 1g fiber per 100g, a source of fiber claim cannot be substantiated. Moreover, if a health claim is made, the Advertiser should declare the nutrient content as a part of the back of pack nutrition information [as per FSSAI guidelines], which is absent in the current case. While fruits are very good source of several vitamins, minerals, phytonutrients and dietary fiber, all of which are essential for good health, jam manufacturing process involves high heat which destroys the inherent micronutrients present in the jam. Hence nutrient content and function claim cannot be substantiated in a category like Jam unless the manufacturer has fortified the product. Further, Health claims, Disease risk reduction claims like ""antioxidants that help in fighting cancers"" can only be made if the product follows certain criteria- a. Health Claims are always to be stated as part of a balanced diet. b. Certain amount of nutrient/ ingredient which is contributing to the health benefit is mentioned, on a per serve basis and additionally, a statement that in order to obtain the claimed benefit, the daily intake of the nutrient/ ingredient should be taken from the same food or any other food containing the beneficial nutrient is mentioned. c. Health claim regarding Vitamin s and minerals should be supported by declaring the % RDA. None of the above criteria for making a health claim is being met by the Advertiser. Hence, a sweeping statement as made by the Advertiser on its website and on pack, without any substantiation whatsoever is misleading and wrongful on part of the Advertiser. Further, The Advertiser is claiming on its pack that its Product is ""exotic"". However, the list of ingredients as mentioned on the said website lists out mango as the fruit that has been purportedly added to the Product by the Advertiser. Mango is quite commonly found in India and has been in consumption traditionally. The Advertiser has not substantiated as to how and in what manner Mixed Fruit Jam made with the mango may be considered ""exotic"". The Advertiser has wrongfully made an unsubstantiated, unsupported and uncorroborated claim of “exotic"" with respect to mango which is commonly grown/found in India and have been consumed in India traditionally. It is submitted that the Advertiser is claiming that Mango Jam is healthy and is ideal for a full day boost and helps prevent cancers. Such exaggerated, unsubstantiated, and unfounded claims are likely to mislead the consumers into believing that Tops Mango Jam is beneficial for health. It is pertinent to note that the Advertisement is misleading and deceptive. The Advertisement states that the Product has certain health benefits like being ideal for a full day boost, boosting immunity system, fighting cancers etc. The consumers are likely to purchase the Product assuming the stated health benefits, which are not proven, baseless and unsubstantiated. It is submitted that the alleged health benefits of the Product are health/ nutritional claims as the consumer is led to believe that regular consumption of the Product will help in staying healthy and getting a full day boost. Moreover, the claim that the product is ""Exotic"" is misleading and deceptive. Consumers are likely to purchase the Product assuming certain qualities/health benefits of consuming the Product as ""exotic"", whereas actually the Product is made with fruit native to/grown commonly in India.”"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant and forwarded the details of the complaint, verbatim, to the advertiser with a request to respond to the same. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser had, however, not responded to ASCI’s request. The CCC noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the prescribed due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the website advertisement and in the absence of any comments or response from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims, "Health Secrets of Mango Jam: A great source of energy and fiber that gives you a full-day boost. This mango jam is rich in vitamins and nutrients, thus, aid in digestion and boosts immune system. Packed with antioxidants that help in fighting cancers. Various other vitamins and minerals that keep your body and mind healthy”, and pack shot of the Product claiming, "Fruity and Healthy" and "Exotic Jam", were not substantiated with evidence of product efficacy, and are misleading by exaggeration. The website advertisement and the product packaging contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "G. D. Foods MFG. (India) Pvt. Ltd"
PRODUCT:"Tops Tomato No Onion No Garlic Ketchup"

COMPLAINT:

"The advertisement claims - 'Health Secrets of Tomato Ketchup: i. This sauce is a rich source of vitamin A which is commonly associated with healthy eyes. ii. It contributes towards good health as it is low in fat and rich in nutrients. iii. It can help in reducing the risk of prostate cancer."" The Advertiser is giving the benefits of Tomato Ketchup No Onion No Garlic. However, it is submitted that there are no conclusive studies to prove that the Product helps in preventing prostate cancer, and contributes towards good health. The Advertiser has not substantiated as to how, in what manner, and to what extent Tomato Ketchup helps in preventing prostate cancer, and maintaining good health. While tomatoes are a rich source of Vitamin A, Tops ketchup No Onion No Garlic contains 28% tomato paste and the Vitamin A content of the ketchup is not declared by the Advertiser. For making health claim, as per FSSAI guide lines, the Advertiser should declare the nutrient content (Vitamin A] as a part of the back of pack nutrition information. Health claims, Disease Risk Reduction claims like ""lowering the risk of prostate cancer"" can only be made if the product follows certain criteria- a. Health Claims are always to be stated as part of a balanced diet. b. Certain amount of nutrient/ ingredient which is contributing to the health benefit is mentioned, on a per serve basis and additionally, a statement that in order to obtain the claimed benefit, the daily intake of the nutrient/ ingredient should be taken from the same food or any other food containing the beneficial nutrient is mentioned. c. Health claim regarding Vitamins and minerals should be supported by declaring the % RDA None of the above criteria for making a health claim is being met by the Advertiser. Moreover Ketchup as a category doesn't contain oil/ fat, hence making negative claims like ""no fat "" is misleading the consumer s. Ketchup contains sugar and salt which have been identified as nutrients to limit by FSSAI expert group as well as WHO guidelines on prevention of NCO (n on-communicable diseases]. Given the above fact, claim on maintaining good health should not be made on product like Ketchup. It is submitted that the Advertiser is claiming that Tomato Ketchup No Onion No Garlic has benefits like preventing cancer, maintaining good health etc. Such exaggerated, unsubstantiated, and unfounded claims are likely to mislead the consumers into believing that Tops Tomato Ketchup No Onion No Garlic is beneficial for health. It is pertinent to note that the Advertisement is misleading and deceptive. The Advertisement states that the Product has certain health benefits like preventing cancer etc. The consumers are likely to purchase the Product assuming the stated health benefits, which are not proven, baseless and unsubstantiated. It is submitted that the alleged health benefits of the Product are health/ nutritional claims as the consumer is led to believe that regular consumption of the Product will help in preventing cancer, and cardiovascular diseases.”"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant and forwarded the details of the complaint, verbatim, to the advertiser with a request to respond to the same. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser had, however, not responded to ASCI’s request. The CCC noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the prescribed due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the website advertisement and in the absence of any comments or response from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims, “Health Secrets of Tomato Ketchup: This sauce is a rich source of vitamin A which is commonly associated with healthy eyes. It contributes towards good health as it is low in fat and rich in nutrients. It can help in reducing the risk of prostate cancer”, were not substantiated with evidence of product efficacy, and are misleading by exaggeration. The website advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "G. D. Foods MFG. (India) Pvt. Ltd"
PRODUCT:"Tops Zingy Snack Sauce"

COMPLAINT:

"“The advertisement claims - 'Health Secrets of Zingy Snack Sauce: • It is a rich source of vitamin A that keeps your eyes and immune system healthy. • It may lower the risk of cardiovascular diseases as it practically has no fat. • It brings with it the good health effects and nutrition of fresh tomatoes. The Advertiser is giving the benefits of Zingy Snack Sauce. However, it is submitted that there are no conclusive studies to prove that sauce helps in lowering cardiovascular diseases and keeps immune system healthy. The Advertiser has not substantiated as to how, in what manner, and to what extent Zingy Snack Sauce helps in lowering cardiovascular diseases and keeping the immune system healthy. While tomatoes are a rich source of Vitamin A, the exact percentage of tomatoes and the vitamin A content of the sauce is not declared by the advertiser. For making health claim, as per FSSAI guidelines, the Advertiser should declare the nutrient content [Vitamin A] as a part of the back of pack nutrition information. Health claims, Disease Risk Reduction claims like ""lowering cardiovascular diseases” can only be made if the product follows certain criteria- a. Health Claims are always to be stated as part of a balanced diet. b. Certain amount of nutrient/ ingredient which is contributing to the health benefit is mentioned, on a per serve basis and additionally, a statement that in order to obtain the claimed benefit, the daily intake of the nutrient / ingredient should be taken from the same food or any other food containing the beneficial nutrient is mentioned. c. Health claim regarding Vitamins and minerals should be supported by declaring the % RDA None of the above criteria for making a health claim is being met by the Advertiser. Moreover sauce as a category doesn't contain oil/ fat, hence making negative claims like ""no fat"" is misleading the consumers. Sauce contains sugar and salt which have been identified as nutrients to limit by FSSAI expert group as well as WHO guidelines on prevention of NCO [non-communicable diseases). Given the above fact, claim on lowering cardiovascular diseases should not be made on product like Zingy Snack Sauce. It is submitted that the Advertiser is claiming that Zingy Snack Sauce has benefits like lowering cardiovascular diseases etc. Such exaggerated, unsubstantiated, and unfounded claims are likely to mislead the consumers into believing that Tops Zingy Snack Sauce is beneficial for health. It is pertinent to note that the Advertisement is misleading and deceptive. The Advertisement states that the Product has certain health benefits like maintaining a healthy immune system, lowering cardiovascular diseases etc. The consumers are likely to purchase the Product assuming the stated health benefits, which are not proven, baseless and unsubstantiated. It is submitted that the alleged health benefits of the Product are health/ nutritional claims as the consumer is led to believe that regular consumption of the Product will help in preventing cancer, and cardiovascular diseases.”"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant and forwarded the details of the complaint, verbatim, to the advertiser with a request to respond to the same. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser had, however, not responded to ASCI’s request. The CCC noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the prescribed due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the website advertisement and in the absence of any comments or response from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims, “Health Secrets of Zingy Snack Sauce: It is a rich source of vitamin A that keeps your eyes and immune system healthy. It may lower the risk of cardiovascular diseases as it practically has no fat. It brings with it the good health effects and nutrition of fresh tomatoes”, were not substantiated with evidence of product efficacy, and are misleading by exaggeration. The website advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "G. D. Foods MFG. (India) Pvt. Ltd"
PRODUCT:"Tops Sweet & Sour Sauce"

COMPLAINT:

"The advertisement claims - ""Health Secrets of Sweet & Sour Sauce: • Made with fresh tomatoes, this snack sauce has anti-cancer and cardiovascular disease fighting properties. • It is rich in anti-oxidants and reduces the risk of various health problems. • It also has the highest quantities of Vitamin A, Vitamin C, and Vitamin E."" The Advertiser is giving the benefits of Sweet and Sour Sauce. However, it is submitted that there are no conclusive studies to prove that Sweet and Sour Sauce helps in preventing cancer, and lowering cardiovascular diseases. The Advertiser has not substantiated as to how, in what manner, and to what extent Sweet and Sour Sauce helps in preventing cancer, and lowering cardiovascular diseases. While tomatoes are a rich source of Vitamin A, the exact amount of tomato paste and the Vitamin A, C and E content of the ketchup is not declared by the Advertiser. For making health claim, as per FSSAI guidelines, the Advertiser should declare the nutrient content (Vitamin A, C and E) as a part of the back of pack nutrition information. Health claims, Disease Risk Reduction claims like ""lowering cardiovascular diseases and reducing the risk of cancer"" can only be made if the product follows certain criteria- a. Health Claims are always to be stated as part of a balanced diet. b. Certain amount of nutrient/ ingredient which is contributing to the health benefit is mentioned, on a per serve basis and additionally, a statement that in or der to obtain the claimed benefit, the daily intake of the nutrient/ ingredient should be taken from the same food or any other food containing the beneficial nutrient is mentioned. c. Health claim regarding Vitamins and minerals should be supported by declaring the % RDA. None of the above criteria for making a health claim is being met by the Advertiser. Further, sauce contains sugar and salt which have been identified as nutrients to limit by FSSAI expert group as well as WHO guidelines on prevention of NCO [non¬ communicable diseases]. Given the above fact, claim on lowering cardiovascular diseases should not be made on product like sauce. It is submitted that the Advertiser is claiming that Sweet and Sour Sauce has benefits like preventing cancer, lowering cardiovascular diseases etc. Such exaggerated, unsubstantiated, and unfounded claims are likely to mislead the consumers into believing that Tops Sweet and Sour Sauce is beneficial for health. It is pertinent to note that the Advertisement is misleading and deceptive. The Advertisement states that the Product has certain health benefits like preventing cancer, lowering cardiovascular diseases etc. The consumers are likely to purchase the Product assuming the stated health benefits, which are not proven, baseless and unsubstantiated. It is submitted that the alleged health benefits of the Product are health/nutritional claims as the consumer is led to believe that regular consumption of the Product will help in preventing cancer, and cardiovascular diseases.”"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant and forwarded the details of the complaint, verbatim, to the advertiser with a request to respond to the same. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser had, however, not responded to ASCI’s request. The CCC noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the prescribed due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the website advertisement and in the absence of any comments or response from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims, "Health Secrets of Sweet & Sour Sauce: Made with fresh tomatoes, this snack sauce has anti-cancer and cardiovascular disease fighting properties. It is rich in anti-oxidants and reduces the risk of various health problems. It also has the highest quantities of Vitamin A, Vitamin C, and Vitamin E”, were not substantiated with evidence of product efficacy, and are misleading by exaggeration. The website advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY: "G. D. Foods MFG. (India) Pvt. Ltd"
PRODUCT:"Tops Classic Sauce"

COMPLAINT:

"“The advertisement claims - ""Health Secrets of Classic Sauce: • It is a rich source of vitamin A that helps in keeping your immune system and eyes healthy. • It contributes towards good health as it is low in fat and rich in nutrients. • Having it, two or more times in a week can help in reducing the risk of prostate cancer. The Advertiser is giving the benefits of sauce. However, it is submitted that there are no conclusive studies to prove that sauce helps in preventing prostate cancer, and maintaining good health. The Advertiser has not substantiated as to how, in what manner, and to what extent Classic Sauce helps in preventing prostate cancer, and maintaining good health. The Advertiser has not even mentioned the ingredients and nutrient contents of the sauce. For making health claim, as per FSSAI guidelines, the Advertiser should declare the nutrient content] as a part of the back of pack nutrition information. Health claims, Disease Risk Reduction claims like ""reducing the risk of prostate cancer"" can only be made if the product follows certain criteria- a. Health Claims are always to be stated as part of a balanced diet. b. Certain amount of nutrient/ingredient which is contributing to the health benefit is mentioned, on a per serve basis and additionally, a statement that in order to obtain the claimed benefit, the daily intake of the nutrient/ ingredient should be taken from the same food or any other food containing the beneficial nutrient is mentioned. c. Health claim regarding Vitamins and minerals should be supported by declaring the % RDA None of the above criteria for making a health claim is being met by the Advertiser. Moreover sauce as a category doesn't contain oil/ fat, hence making negative claims like ""no fat"" is misleading the consumers. Ketchup contains sugar and salt which have been identified as nutrients to limit by FSSAI expert group as well as WHO guidelines on prevention of NCD (non-communicable diseases]. Given the above fact, claim on maintaining good health should not be made on product like sauce. It is submitted that the Advertiser is claiming that Classic Sauce has benefits like preventing cancer etc. Such exaggerated, unsubstantiated, and unfounded claims are likely to mislead the consumers into believing that Tops Classic Sauce is beneficial for health. It is pertinent to note that the Advertisement is misleading and deceptive. The Advertisement states that the Product has certain health benefits like preventing cancer, maintaining good health etc. The consumers are likely to purchase the Product assuming the stated health benefits, which are not proven, baseless and unsubstantiated. It is submitted that the alleged health benefits of the Product are health/ nutritional claims as the consumer is led to believe that regular consumption of the Product will help in preventing cancer, and cardiovascular diseases.”"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant and forwarded the details of the complaint, verbatim, to the advertiser with a request to respond to the same. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser had, however, not responded to ASCI’s request. The CCC noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the prescribed due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the website advertisement and in the absence of any comments or response from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims, "Health Secrets of Classic Sauce: It is a rich source of vitamin A that helps in keeping your immune system and eyes healthy. It contributes towards good health as it is low in fat and rich in nutrients. Having it, two or more times in a week can help in reducing the risk of prostate cancer”, were not substantiated with evidence of product efficacy, and are misleading by exaggeration. The website advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "G. D. Foods MFG. (India) Pvt. Ltd"
PRODUCT:"Tops Continental Sauce"

COMPLAINT:

"“The advertisement claims - ""Health Secrets of Continental Sauce: • Keeps your immune system and eyes healthy as it is rich in Vitamin A. • It contributes towards good health as it is low in fat and rich in nutrients. • It can help in reducing the risk of prostate cancer."" The Advertiser is giving the benefits of Continental Snack Sauce. However, it is submitted that there are no conclusive studies to prove that the Product helps in preventing prostate cancer, and contributes towards good health. The Advertiser has not substantiated as to how, in what manner, and to what extent Continental Snack Sauce helps in preventing prostate cancer, and maintaining good health and eyesight. While tomatoes are a rich source of Vitamin A, amount of vegetables, tomato paste and the Vitamin A content of the Product is not declared by the Advertiser. For making health claim, as per FSSAI guidelines, the Advertiser should declare the nutrient content [Vitamin A] as a part of the back of pack nutrition information. Health claims, Disease Risk Reduction claims like ""lowering the risk of prostate cancer"" can only be made if the product follows certain criteria- a. Health Claims are always to be stated as part of a balanced diet. b. Certain amount of nutrient/ ingredient which is contributing to the health benefit is mentioned, on a per serve basis and additionally, a statement that in order to obtain the claimed benefit, the daily intake of the nutrient/ ingredient should be taken from the same food or any other food containing the beneficial nutrient is mentioned. c. Health claim regarding Vitamins and minerals should be supported by declaring the % RDA None of the above criteria for making a health claim is being met by the Advertiser. Moreover Sauce as a category doesn't contain oil/ fat, hence making negative claims like ""no fat"" is misleading the consumers. Snack sauce contains sugar and salt which have been identified as nutrients to limit by FSSAI expert group as well as WHO guidelines on prevention of NCO [non-communicable diseases). Given the above fact, claim on maintaining good health should not be made on product like the Advertiser's Snack Sauce. It is submitted that the Advertiser is claiming that Continental Snack Sauce has benefits like preventing cancer, maintaining good health and eyesight etc. Such exaggerated, unsubstantiated, and unfounded claims are likely to mislead the consumers into believing that Tops Continental Snack Sauce is beneficial for health. It is pertinent to note that the Advertisement is misleading and deceptive. The Advertisement states that the Product has certain health benefits like preventing cancer etc. The consumers are likely to purchase the Product assuming the stated health benefits, which are not proven, baseless and unsubstantiated. It is submitted that the alleged health benefits of the Product are health/nutritional claims as the consumer is led to believe that regular consumption of the Product will help in preventing cancer, and cardiovascular diseases.”"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant and forwarded the details of the complaint, verbatim, to the advertiser with a request to respond to the same. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser had, however, not responded to ASCI’s request. The CCC noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the prescribed due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the website advertisement and in the absence of any comments or response from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims, "Health Secrets of Continental Sauce: Keeps your immune system and eyes healthy as it is rich in Vitamin A. It contributes towards good health as it is low in fat and rich in nutrients. It can help in reducing the risk of prostate cancer”, were not substantiated with evidence of product efficacy, and are misleading by exaggeration. The website advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Waghanna Vaidyakiya Seva Pvt. Ltd"
PRODUCT:"Waghanna Vaidyakiya Seva Pvt. Ltd"

COMPLAINT:

"Claim: Successful cure of incurable diseases including Cerebral Palsy, Down's Syndrome, Paralysis, Asthma. Complaint: “Print ad claiming successful cure for ""incurable diseases"" including Cerebral Palsy, Down’s Syndrome, Paralysis, Asthma. False and misleading claims. Possible violation of Drugs & Magic Remedies Act”"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

"Bronchial Asthma Item No. 7- Schedule J Paralysis Item No. 39- DMR Act 1954 Item No. 40- Schedule J Diseases and Disorders of Brain Item No. 10- DMR Act"

 

COMPANY: "DABUR INDIA LIMITED"
PRODUCT:"Dabur Odomos"

COMPLAINT:

"Fast Track Complaint received against the TV Commercial of “Dabur India Ltd – Dabur Odomos”, which is said to have appeared on &TV, Zee TV(*), 9XM, Colors Marathi(*), Star Jalsa(*), Udaya Movies and through Facebook page (https://www.facebook.com/DaburOdomos/videos/1073701352733011/) from Godrej Consumer Products Ltd. As per the complaint, In the TVC being aired by Dabur India Limited, the Doctor and later the voice-over suggest to a mother, that as per a test conducted in a NABL accredited laboratory to find out which product which gives best protection against mosquitoes amongst the mosquito coils or liquid machine or Odomos, a visual representation is made to show that liquid vapouriser machine gives only 66.0% protection, mosquito coil gives 64.0% protection whereas only Odomos gives 99.9% protection against mosquito bites. We would like to iterate that the test methodology used in the advertisements are different as compared to internationally accepted guidelines. Since Odomos is registered under FDA, Coil & Liquid Vaporizer machines is registered Insecticide Act and CIB&RC, the testing methodologies are completely different for both categories. The TVC claims “yani machoro se best protection” & “isliye na machine se, na coil se, best protection sirf Dabur Odomos se! The statement “yani machoro se best protection” & “isliye na machine se, na coil se, best protection sirf Dabur Odomos se” is clearly disparaging the entire Govt. approved insecticide liquid vaporizer machine and insecticide coil category products. Such a statement in the said TVC clearly gives out a completely wrong impression to the consumers that liquid vaporizer machine and coil are inferior products against dengue-causing mosquitoes and only Odomos skin cream is superior and gives the best results which is not true at all. These are serious and wrongful allegations against the liquid vaporizer machine and coil category. Thus it is an incorrect comparative narrative (which is being super imposed with depiction of a Doctoral advise to a mother for the protection of her son against dengue) essentially aiming to mislead the consumers more against the credibility of usage of home insecticides and in the bargain, seek a commercial gain wrongfully from such incorrect and wrong product comparative narration. Through the said TVC, Dabur India Limited has resorted to directly maligning the entire home insecticide Liquid vaporizer machine and Coil category of products which ought not to have been made comparable products when test conditions and user norms are not the same as to ‘long-duration’ effectiveness against mosquito-free environment or mosquito bites. Depicting household insecticides (mosquito coils and liquid vapouriser machines) as being ineffective for protection against dengue) in such bad light and in the process, mislead naïve consumers through a visual representation of Doctor’s advise, to make them believe in such disparaging claims/statements about home insecticide products to highlight effectiveness of ‘Dabur Odomos’ skin application cream (after comparing such skin cream with a completely different category of home insecticide products) and in the process damaging GCPL’s product category worthiness is not to be allowed by ASCI. The TVC is clearly misleading consumers and are tarnishing the entire category of Government/CIB-RC approved home insecticide products range of liquid vaporizer machines and mosquito coil manufacturers. Such a comparison of the products is akin to comparing apples with oranges, without highlighting the test methods, protocols, test-timing parameters and test-environ simulation criteria for home insecticides and thereafter measure effectiveness. In the advertisement, we would like to mention that the tests have not been conducted scientifically nor it is based on internationally accepted protocols. There are serious lapses on the test results which are provided on http://www.odomosprotect.com/Odomos99percent.html. The data representation is biased and partial representation of the facts as per international guidelines applicable for testing and use of household insecticides and / or to measure their effectiveness on containing mosquitoes thus impacting them with insecticide toxicity in a specified test-environment.”"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The Complainant as well as the Advertiser representatives were given the opportunity for personal hearing with the Technical expert and the ASCI Secretary General. Data submitted by the complainant and the advertiser was reviewed by the technical expert. The FTCP reviewed the TVC and claims made therein and noted the Advertiser’s written response. The FTCP concluded as follows – The FTCP noted that the TVC portrays the benefits provided by different product formats in a typical home use situation. The method used by the advertiser is adapted from a field test method which is closest way a consumer is exposed to them. The results are based on the study, conducted in a NABL accredited laboratory adapted from World Health Organisation (WHO) protocol for initial 30 minutes. The study portrays the benefits of using a personal application product like Odomos Cream in the first thirty minutes. While the product formats maybe different, the end benefit (protection from mosquitos) being the same, the FTCP did not find this comparison to be objectionable. This complaint was NOT UPHELD. The advertiser shared summary of product test report to support their claim. In absence of any data contrary to advertiser’s claimed values the FTCP did not consider the claim of superior protection from mosquito bites by personal care products to be objectionable. However, since the advertiser did not furnish comparative data versus other personal care products, the claim “yani machoro se best protection” & “isliye na machine se, na coil se, best protection sirf Dabur Odomos se” were not substantiated and were misleading by exaggeration. This complaint was UPHELD. The TVC was in contravention of Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The TVC is about product benefit in the first 30 minutes. In this context, the TVC was not considered to be disparaging to entire home insecticide liquid vaporizer machine and coil category and Godrej products in particular. This complaint was NOT UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "AMITY UNIVERSITY "
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"“Amity University claims no. 1 Pvt University by NIRF, Min of HRD.” “1. The ad says ""Indias No.1 Non-for -profit University in the India ranking 2017"" NIRF GoI Kindly look into the ranking of Ministry of Human resource Development (Min HRD) GoI, a. Nowhere Min HRD have stated ""Not-for-Profit University"" for any of the university/institute https://www.nirfindia.org/ OverallRanking.html b. Min HRD have placed Amity University in 86th position out of 100. This position is FAR BEYOND what is claimed in Ad as Ranking c. May I also refer you to my earlier complaint against Amity University where they claimed 'ranked by QS"" You have upheld my findings and communicated in your email dated 22/07/15 1505-C.328 – Your complaint against the advertisement Amity University d. Amity University is ALWAYS misusing the word ""ranking"" to mislead the public, keeping in view of admission to the future session 2017-2018 academic session. \ Keeping in view of misleading information in public domain stringent action must be initiated against Amity University. They must not be allowed to advertise these false information and mislead the public.” “I cannot answer as I am not aware of any other University ahead or behind Amity University which claims ""not for profit"". Amity University is sponsoring major News channels, IPL events and pump huge money into advertising in various media. I wonder where money is coming from for such mega campaign especially before admission season. May be it is not ASCI job to find the source. But the fact is no other University put so much money in advt and still claim ""not for profit"". 1. The phrase ""not-for-profit"" attached to an entity in its ad to promote Amity University must be substantiated, else it amounts to intentionally misleading public. 2. When Amity University depicts such campaign with Min HRD, it is a serious case of misrepresentation and misleading campaign. 3. They always misuse the word ""Ranking"" and attach it with their ad 4. Can any private organisation use GoI sign in their ad campaign? I would request ASCI to address considering the merits of this specific case on a high priority basis before they succeed in misleading public.”"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

"Advertiser (Amity University) has filed a Review petition against the recommendations of the CCC with regard to the print advertisement of Amity University which appeared in Education Times, Times of India on 24th April 2017, claiming "India's No.1 not-for-profit private University in the India Rankings 2017" - with the logo of NIRF, Ministry of HRD, Government of India. The Complainant's grievance was that the advertisement is not honest and truthful as the NIRF overall ranking of Amity University is at Sr. No. 86 in the overall rankings given by Ministry of HRD, Government of India, and that "Not-for-profit" is not a separate category recognized by NIRF. Amity University contended that in the rankings given by NIRF to Universities, Amity University is at Sr. No. 52, but amongst all private universities it is at the top. It further stated that the Income Tax department has granted it Exemption Certificate under Section 12A of Income Tax Act which shows that it is a "not-for-profit" organization. The CCC has taken the view that there was no information to suggest that Ministry of HRD gives rankings for "private not-for-profit" categories in the country separately and the advertiser has distorted the findings in the survey. In its application for Review process, the advertiser has contended that under the University Grants Commission Act 1956, educational institutions have been classified into 5 different categories, one of which is "State Private University established by a State Act". Amity University has been established under "Amity University Uttar Pradesh Act 2005". Hence it falls in this category of private universities. In the list "India Rankings 2017: Universities" in NIRF ranking, Amity University is at Sr. No. 52, and all the universities up to Sr. No. 51 are Central Universities/State Universities or deemed-to-be universities. Amity University is the only private university amongst the first 52 NIRF ranked universities. Moreover "not-for-profit" claim is also justified in view of the certificate granted by income tax department. Notice of the hearing before the Review panel was sent to Amity University but they informed the Chief Complaints Officer of ASCI that they would not remain present for the hearing, and the Review panel may decide the matter on the basis of the material placed before it. The Complainant had sent an email dated 24th July 2017 regretting his inability to attend the hearing. Guideline No.1.1 in the ASCI Code for Self-Regulation of Advertising Content in India provides that the advertisers should be truthful and advertisers are required to provide substantiation of objective ascertainable facts as and when called upon to do so by ASCI. The ASCI guideline for advertising of educational institutions and programmes (guideline No.4) provides that advertisers shall not make claims regarding institution's competitive ranking unless they are substantiated with evidence. I have taken note of the material placed by the Complainant and the Advertiser. The advertisement in question not only refers to ranking given by National Institutional Ranking Foundation (NIRF) but also uses National Emblem, creating an impression that NIRF has treated "not-for-profit" as a separate category and placed Amity University at the top of such universities. The NIRF rankings published by the Ministry of Human Resources Development, Government of India under the title "Indian Rankings 2017: Overall Ranking" show Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore with rank 1 and score of 83.28. Amity University is shown at rank 86 rank with score of 39.17. Similarly, in the "Indian Rankings 2017: Universities", Indian Institute of Science Bangalore has been ranked 1 with score of 83.28 whereas Amity University is at rank 52 with score of 39.17. Both the lists show the institutes/universities strictly in the order of merit without showing any category like private university, or "not-for-profit" university. Apart from that, it would appear that students seeking admission to a university or any other educational institution generally like to consider two basic parameters: (i) the standard of teaching and research; and (ii) affordability of fees. The claim, "No.1 not-for-profit private university" would convey an impression that it is a university of eminence and still the fees being charged by Amity University would be affordable as compared to fees being charged by other universities. The advertiser has not placed any material to indicate that the fees being charged by it are less than the fees being charged by universities at Sr. No.1 to 51. In fact, most of the universities above the Amity University in the rankings are central universities or state universities. It is a matter of common knowledge that central/state universities are substantially funded from government funds and therefore, fees being charged by them are ordinarily lower than the fees being charged by private universities. Hence, the impression sought to be created by use of the words "not-for-profit" is misleading. For reasons aforesaid, I uphold the findings of the CCC. The claim of the advertiser cannot be considered as truthful, and is misleading by ambiguity and implication, and therefore violates the Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as the provisions of Chapters 1.1 and 1.4 of the ASCI Code."

 

COMPANY: "KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"Kotak Mahindra's 811 advertisement that claims to be India's first downloadable account. The claim is made on online banners as well as TVCs and digital videos. They are promoting this bumper-ad video extensively on YouTube. Additionally, refer to below screenshot of their ad copy on Google with the same communication. Kotak 811 is claiming to be India's first downloadable account but do not seem to be validating this claim anywhere which is quite misleading. They cannot take this positioning given that Federal & Digibank by DBS had launched this feature much before them. From review of the posters and videos of Kotak, the same appear to be contravening rule 1.1 (Truthful and Honest Representation) under Chapter 1 of the ASCI code."

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: NOT UPHELD

"Kotak Mahindra Bank has filed this application for a Review of the CCC Recommendation dated 13th June 2017 upholding the complaint against their YouTube advertisement and Google advertisement of ""Kotak Mahindra's 811 Service"" mentioning ""India's first downloadable bank account"". The complaint was lodged by DBS Bank/ Federal Bank contending that they had introduced the system of 'downloading a new bank account' about a year and a half back with the same features - a customer downloading the new bank account on her/his mobile. Hence the advertisement was not truthful and honest. Kotak Mahindra's response was that there was a vital difference in as much as the Advertiser's account can be downloaded and the consumer can operate the bank account without any physical intervention; whereas in case of complainant banks' accounts, the customer has to submit physical documents to the bank branch or wait for bank officials to come to her/his residence to collect KYC documents such as PAN card, and Aadhaar card. In case of the Advertiser, the customer can download the bank account by giving PAN number and Aadhaar card number on the mobile itself and, therefore, no physical intervention is necessary and the customer can straightaway operate the account. The CCC recommended that the claim of ""India's first downloadable account"" made by the Advertiser in its online advertisement was ambiguous and not fully substantiated, since in the current banking scenario, every account of most banks is ""downloadable"" in the sense that the accounts are operable on internet. Further, the online advertisement nowhere gives any details of its claim, that ""downloadable account"" means that the account could be opened online unlike other banks. The CCC opined that the advertisement was misleading by ambiguity and omission to the reference of it being ""downloadable opening of account"". Hence it was considered that the advertisement had violated the provisions of Chapters 1.1 and 1.4 of the ASCI Code. After giving the above findings, the CCC requested the advertiser to modify the disputed advertisement and withdraw the claim objected to. At the hearing of the Review application, the representatives of the Advertiser submitted that the CCC has failed to notice the vital distinction of physical intervention required in case of DBS Bank and other Banks, which is not required in case of downloading a new bank account with the Advertiser. Advertiser's representatives further relied on RBI Circular No. RBI/2016-17/176. DBR.ML.BC.No. 18/14.01.001/2016-17 dated 8th December 2016 - ""Amendment to Master Direction (MD) on KYC"" which by an additional proviso added to Section 17 of Banking Regulation Act, 1949 permits opening of account by using OTP based e-KYC. Hence, prior to issuance of the said RBI Circular it was not open to any bank to permit a customer to open and operate a bank account without physical verification of KYC documents. Representatives of Complainant DBS Bank submitted that even as per the RBI Circular, physical verification of KYC documents is required after one year and the aggregate balance of all the deposit accounts of the customer shall not exceed rupees one lakh, and the aggregate of all credits in a financial year, in all the deposits taken together, shall not exceed rupees two lakhs; but there are no such limits in case an account is opened with DBS Bank by downloading. The Complainant's representatives placed reliance on the dictionary meaning of the expression ""downloadable"" and submitted that other banks had introduced this downloading of account earlier than the Advertiser. As defined by the Cambridge Dictionary, downloadable means 'able to be downloaded'. The same dictionary defines download as 'to copy or move programs or information into a computer's memory, especially from the internet or a larger computer'. The Advertiser's representatives submitted that these are all product features and they do not take away the novelty of a bank account being downloaded and operated straight away without any physical verification of documents. Hence the account is not only opened through down-loading, but can be operated immediately without the customer being required to come to the bank branch or the bank representatives going to the customer's house. Reliance was also placed on the judgment of High Court of Delhi in Havells India Ltd. And Ors Vs Amritanshu Khaitan and Ors. 2015(62)PTC64(Del) = MANU/DE/0791/2015 in support of the contention that advertisements are not to be read as if they are some testamentary provision in a Will or a clause in some agreement with every word being carefully considered. In determining the meaning of an advertisement, one should keep in mind that the general public expects a certain amount of hyperbole in advertising. Having heard the representatives of the Advertiser and the review petitioner, it is clear that in case of the Advertiser. a bank account can be downloaded and the customer can straight away start operating her/his account without the need for any physical intervention, that is, without the customer being required to visit a bank branch, or the bank officials visiting the customer's residence; which is a very important distinguishing feature highlighted by the Advertiser."" It is not the complainant's grievance that the Advertiser has made any disparaging remark about any other bank. In the twenty second advertisement, the thrust of the Advertiser's message is the ease of downloading a new bank account with the Advertiser by e-KYC method and in the last second, the voice message sums up the entire advertisement by saying ""India's first downloadable bank account. Since the RBI has permitted opening of bank account by using OTP based e-KYC only from 8th December 2016, the Advertiser's claim in its advertisement has to be accepted as being honest and truthful. The Review Application is, therefore, allowed and the recommendation of the CCC is set aside."

 

COMPANY: "STAR DENTAL CENTRE P. LTD"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“Over 4,00,000 satisfied customers”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

"1. The Department of Consumer Affairs (DoCA), Government of India had engaged ASCI to identify misleading advertisements and has instructed ASCI to submit details of all complaints processed, with their compliance status. In particular, DoCA had approved for processing, a complaint against the print advertisement of ""Star Dental Centre Private Ltd - Clove Dental"", which appeared in Times of India, Jaipur, English Edition on 4th March 2017. The matter was taken up for inquiry and the advertiser was given an opportunity to submit their response specific to the objections against the advertiser's claim, ""Over 4,00,000 satisfied customers"". 2. The advertiser submitted their response dated 29th May 2017 stating that since inception, ""Clove Dental"", the Largest Dental Chain of India, had successfully treated and added more than 4,00,000 satisfied patients in its network of Clinics (currently 150 in number) spread all over India. The annexure to the response indicated the number of clinics and the number of footfalls for the last 6 years. Further, the annexure indicated that the total number of footfalls since inception was 442,896. 3. The CCC examined the print advertisement, the complaint and the advertiser's response; and opined that the claim relating to the ""400,000 number of customers"" could not be considered as adequately substantiated since the figures given by the advertiser are their own internal data which have not been verified or audited by any independent third party. The CCC further observed that it is not clear whether these figures which are described as 'Footfalls', represent only the first time visit by patients, or include repeat visits by patients. In respect of the claim in the advertisement relating to ""satisfied customers"", the CCC opined that there was no information provided by the advertiser to substantiate this part of the claim made in the advertisement through any independent survey, etc. The CCC further observed that on the plea of 'doctor-patient' privacy and confidentiality, the advertiser could not abdicate the responsibility of substantiating the claims that had been made in the advertisement; and that the patient- data could, without being divulged to any outsiders, have been audited and checked by their Chartered Accountants, or any other reputed health research organization after entering into appropriate agreements of confidentiality, who could have thereafter certified the claims relating to the number of patients handled by the hospital made in this advertisement. In view of the above, the CCC concluded that the claim, ""Over 4,00,000 satisfied customers"", both in respect of the total number of customers and the assertion that they are all satisfied, was not adequately substantiated, and was therefore misleading by exaggeration and violative of the provisions of the Chapters 1.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was accordingly upheld. It was, therefore, suggested to suitably modify the advertisement and withdraw the claim objected to. 4. The advertiser has now applied for review of the above recommendation of the CCC. They have submitted, together with their review application, a copy of the certificate dated 15th July 2017 of Chartered Accountants B. B. & Associates in support of their claim. 5. I have heard the representatives of the advertiser at the IRP hearing today. The attention of the representatives was invited to the statement made in the CA certificate that what is verified is the number of invoices and not necessarily the number of customers; because where more than one invoice is issued to a single patient for undergoing different treatments, the CA has considered the footfall to be such number of invoices issued to that patient. Similarly, if any patient visiting the clinic does not undertake any treatment and consequently no invoice is issued to such a patient, the same was not considered as a footfall. 6. The representatives were not in a position to assert that the number of invoices reflect the number of customers. As regards the claim, ""satisfied customers"", the representatives of the advertiser contended that since no customer had gone to a consumer court dissatisfied with the care he was given in the advertiser's facilities, they had taken this as satisfaction of customers. Such an argument cannot be accepted; because customers who are not satisfied with a particular dental clinic would not rush to a consumer court and file a complaint, they would simply go to another dental clinic. 7. The Representative also contended that the very fact that the number of their clinics as well as the customers are growing supports their claim. While the growing number may show general overall popularity, it cannot be accepted that each of over 4,00,000 customers is satisfied with the treatment that he / she has received at the advertiser's dental clinics. 8. Of course, where the customer has gone to the advertiser's dental clinic for one treatment, and after completion of that treatment again goes to the advertiser's clinic, such a customer would certainly be considered as a satisfied customer. Such satisfaction could also be claimed on the basis of verifiable feedback from the customers. 9. In view of the above discussion which took place in the presence of the representatives of the advertiser, the advertiser has agreed to suitably modify their claim in respect of ""satisfied customers"" made in the advertisement. 10. The review application is accordingly disposed of, without disturbing the recommendations of the CCC, but subject to the advertiser suitably modifying their claim."

 

COMPANY: "TATA GLOBAL BEVERAGES LTD"
PRODUCT:"Tetley Super Green Tea"

COMPLAINT:

"1. Roz ke superhumans ke liye 2. First time in India 3. Energy and immunity boosters like vitamin B6 and vitamin C. 4. Vitamin B6 helps reduce tiredness and fatigue. 5. Vitamin C helps support your immune system."

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"We object to the scene when a person on the first floor balcony pushes a flower pot over the ledge causing it to fall down. It could hurt someone standing below. Such scenes could encourage children or teenagers to imitate such dangerous practices. Similarly, showing a person throwing a ball aimed at the stomach is a dangerous practice. How can drinking green tea make a person superhuman? Can the company substantiate claims (ii) and (iii) by giving reports from independent agencies? Claims (iv) and (v) are about the characteristics of vitamin B6 and C. They are not specific to the product. How much of immunity boosters like vitamin B6 and vitamin C? are in the product? Are the quantities significant enough to make an impact on the consumer? Please advice with independent studies to prove this. According to us, the advertisement contravenes Chapter 1.4 and 1.5 of ASCI code.”."

Recommendation: NOT UPHELD

"Tata Global Beverages Ltd has filed this review application against the CCC recommendations dated 30th June 2017 partly upholding the complaint filed by the "Consumer Education Research Centre" (CERC), Ahmedabad, on the TVC related to the product ‘Tata Tetly Super Green Tea'. The complainant had objected to the TVC of the product which appeared on Zee TV on 8th April 2017, on various grounds including: (i) Claim, "First time in India": not backed by survey data. (ii) Claims "Energy and immunity boosters like Vitamin B6 and Vitamin C", "Vitamin B6 helps reduce tiredness and fatigue.", "Vitamin C helps support your immune system": not supported with evidence. The complainant contended that it was not shown that these products have significant quantities of the said Vitamins. Other objections were - "Can the company substantiate claims by giving reports from independent agencies? Claims are about the characteristics of Vitamin B6 and C: they are not specific to the product. How much of immunity boosters like Vitamin B6 and Vitamin C are in the product? Are the quantities significant enough to make an impact on the consumer? Please advise with independent studies to prove this". In their response, the advertiser had placed on record, material to show that each of their product tea-bags has Vitamin B6 in the proportion of 0.470 mg of Vitamin B6 per 120 ml brew of tea, which constitutes about 20% of the daily requirement of the same. Further, the advertiser submitted an analytic lab-report given by M/s Eurofins (an international company engaged in food, pharma and environmental laboratory testing) dated 24th March 2017, which shows that each of the advertiser's tea bags has 12.31 mg of Vitamin C per 120 ml brew of tea. The advertiser also placed reliance on scientific opinion of the European Food Safety Authority ("efsa") published in the efsa Journal 2010 which supports the generic claim of the advertiser that dietary intake of Vitamin C contributes to normal energy-yielding metabolism, and helps support immune system. The CCC took the view in their recommendation that the advertiser had not substantiated that fortification of their product 'green-tea' with Vitamins B6 and Vitamin C was done by the advertiser for the first time in India. The CCC also took a view that the stability and availability of the Vitamins B6 and C in the claimed quantities in a normal consumer's cup were not substantiated. The Advertiser has submitted together with their review application, report of a survey conducted by 'IMRB International', which they had obtained tea-bag packets of different brands from 15 retail outlets in each of the three cities of Mumbai, Bangalore and Delhi. The summary of the said survey report of IMRB dated 16th June 2017 states: "We have visited 15 retail stores each in Delhi, Mumbai & Bangalore and recorded 120 different green tea brands across the 3 cities; and on examination, only "Tetley Super Green Tea" has the promise of "Fortified with Vitamins" on its pack. No other brand has "Fortified with Vitamins" mentioned on its pack." The advertiser has also placed other evidentiary material along with their review application, in support of their case that the above described percentages of Vitamin B6 and Vitamin C are available to the consumer in a normal cup of their brand of green tea. At the IRP hearing, the complainant or their representatives did not appear and they informed over an e-mail that their original complaint should be taken as their submission. The representatives of the advertiser appeared and explained the contents of the scientific opinion of efsa, and the Analytical Reports dated 24th & 27th March, 2017 of eurofins; and the results of 'Accelerated Shelf Life Testing' and 'Real Time Shelf Life Testing' which have addressed the concerns voiced by CCC; and they further submitted that the advertiser is making the claims in respect of their green tea being fortified with Vitamins B6 and C as supported by scientific opinion, and that their claims do not go beyond that. Having heard the representatives of the advertiser and having seen the material produced by the advertiser in substantiation of their claims, I am satisfied that the advertiser cannot be said to have made a claim which is not truthful and honest. In view of the above, since the fortification of Vitamin B6 and C in the advertiser's product 'green tea' has been adequately substantiated, and further since it has been shown that consumption of Vitamins B6 and C reduces tiredness and fatigue, and boosts the immune system as per claims permissible internationally by efsa and the Advertiser's Super Green Tea is shown to be fortified with Vitamin B6 and C in significant quantities, the claims of the advertiser in this regard cannot be said to be unfounded and I, therefore, allow the review application and set aside the recommendations of the CCC with respect to the claims of the advertiser for which an IRP was sought, i.e., that the advertiser's product had "Energy and immunity boosters like Vitamin B6 and Vitamin C", "Vitamin B6 helps reduce tiredness and fatigue", and "Vitamin C helps support your immune system". The complaint of CERC, therefore, stands dismissed against these claims. "

 

COMPANY: "Heinz India Limited"
PRODUCT:"Complan"

COMPLAINT:

"Complaint received against the TV Commercial of “Heinz India P. Ltd – Complan”, which is said to have appeared on Star Jalsa, ZEE Bangla. “My complain was against an advertisement of 'complan' the renounced health drink. In that advertise in tv channels of 'star jalsa' , 'zee bangla', they say it is not necessary to take natural vegetables and fruit it the children take complan. I fear that the children will be encouraged to avoid the natural vegetables and it may effect in their next stage of life. So i wanted to lodge a complaint against such an advertisement bit i am failing to send to you. Make help to take such a complain. You may kindly notice in that advertisement that, it is trying to show that the test less or disliking vegetables are not liked by the children. they are taking it upon the force of their parents. The children are taking half and the another half are hiding in a chance of absence of the notice of their parents . Then a parent on behalf of COMPLAIN is saying proudly that if such children take COMPLAN then they can get the DOUBLE nutrition of the said (with a hidden hints of the untold other natural vegetables also) vegetables. so it is not a serious matter to avoid the natural vegetables. I suspect that it is giving a hidden indulgence against the natural nutrition which they may carry through their next life. I fear that this type of advertise may given a bad massage on the mind of the growing children. As a general citizen of India I think it has an urge to bring this notice on your mind without keeping any intention of the product.”"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

"1. Heinz India Limited has filed this application dated 27th June 2017 for a Review of the CCC recommendation dated 2nd June 2017 upholding the complaint against the advertiser’s TVC which is said to have appeared on Star Jalsa and Zee Bangla. 2. The complainant made a grievance that the TVC in question of the advertiser says that it is not necessary to take natural vegetables and fruits, if the children take Complan. The complainant further fears that children will be encouraged to avoid natural vegetables. 3. The advertiser submitted to CCC that the visuals of the TVC are not to be viewed in isolation but have to be viewed holistically in conjunction with the voice over and the disclaimers. The advertiser further stated that most mothers have a tough time getting their children to eat the vegetables in case their children are fussy/picky eaters. The intent of the advertisement is to highlight the importance of vegetables in the diet and how mothers can deal with the issue by supplementing their children’s diet with Complan which helps bridge nutrition gaps owing to fussy eating. Complan provides a solution to fussy eating problem and it should not be construed that they are encouraging fussy eating itself. 4. CCC upheld the complaint and observed that the TVC indicates that children always eat half and have inadequate intake of food. The TVC presents Complan as the replacement to half of regular food which children don’t eat, while being silent on the importance of balanced meal. The CCC concluded that the notion that one can exclude key nutritive food items and replace that gap with Complan is incorrect. The TVC is misleading by implication and contravened Chapter I.4 of the ASCI code as well as Guidelines on Advertising of Food and Beverages Clause No. 3 and No.7. The disclaimers in the TVC were not in compliance with ASCI Guidelines. 5. The representatives of the advertiser have submitted at the review hearing that the TVC does not show mothers telling their children not to take complete meal and to have Complan as a replacement for the meal. Most mothers do have the problem of dealing with “fussy eating” children and Complan only shows how mothers can solve the problem by supplementing the children’s diet with Complan. 6. Reliance is placed on the table containing information on 34 vital nutrients and the benefits of those ingredients. Reliance is also placed on the chart containing protein quality comparison and on the WHO recommendations regarding macro nutrients and their presence in Complan. 7. As regards disclaimers, the representatives submitted that in the original TVC the disclaimers were in English, while the voice over was in Hindi. And, therefore, the CCC has made an observation about non-compliance with ASCI Guidelines because of language mismatch. The representatives submitted that now the following disclaimers are in Hindi and are in compliance with ASCI Guidelines:- “Aadha ka matlab hai bachchon mein khane mein nakhre karne ka aadat. Complan aise bachchon mein poshan ki kami ko poora karne mein madad karta. Complan ko har din santulit ahaar ke saath lena chahiye.” (Aadha refers to the fussy eating habit in children. Complan helps bridge nutrition gaps in such children. Complan to be taken as part of daily balanced diet). 8. None appeared for the complainant at the hearing. 9. Clauses 3 and 7 of the Guidelines of Food and Beverages which read as under: “(3) Advertisements should not disparage good dietary practice or the selection of options, such as fresh fruits and vegetables that accepted dietary opinion recommends should form part of the normal diet; and (7) Advertisements for food and beverages unless nutritionally designed as such should not be promoted or portrayed as meal replacement.” (emphasis supplied) 10. Having considered the material placed by the advertiser and having heard the representatives, there appears to be substance in the advertiser’s case that the advertiser has highlighted the problems faced by mothers having “fussy eating” children, and that there is a large number of such children in the upper socio-economic strata. Hence, TVC cannot be considered as disparaging good dietary practice of eating fresh fruits and vegetables. 11. I would, however, like to add that the words “Bachche hamesha aadha khate hai” (emphasis supplied), apart from not reflecting the actual reality, appear to have caused anxiety in the mind of the complainant that the TVC validates what is a non healthy practice of many children. Hence the word “hamesha” will have to be replaced by other appropriate words. 12. While one can understand the attempt made by the advertiser to suggest a solution, Clauses 3 and 7 of the the ASCI Guidelines are also required to be followed. 13. The disclaimers, whether in English or Hindi, are in comparatively much smaller fonts as compared to the visuals in the TVC and do not seem to run for four seconds as required by ASCI guidelines. Even after correcting the language mismatch the fact remains that the viewers of the TVC would hardly notice those disclaimers. 14. The advertiser’s representatives submitted that since it is only a 20 second commercial, long disclaimers covering the entire frame would take away substantial part of the film. 15. In my view, considering the subject matter of the TV commercial and the viewers who are expected to watch it, the advertiser will have to provide for the disclaimers in the voice over with appropriate words to take care of Clauses 3 and 7 of Guidelines of Food and Beverages. 16. The representatives indicated that they would consider introducing such voice over disclaimers. 17. Subject to the observations made in paras 11 and 15 above, the review application is allowed to the extent that TVC can deal with the problem of anxious mothers having “fussy eating” children and to show that mothers can supplement their children’s diet with Complan. However, this message that Complan is a diet supplement and not a meal replacement can be effectively communicated only by voice over. 18. The review application is disposed of in the above terms."

 
 

 

Complaint to
WhatsApp
DID YOU KNOW?

Developed by Wishtree Technologies LLP