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

Select Month :

 
CCC Recommendations
 

COMPANY:"National Institute of Computer Education (N.I.C.E Institute)"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“100% Job Guarantee”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"NICE Institute, Ranjhi, Jabalpur, M.P. They have been mis-guiding the general public by mentioning the clause & phrase- ""100% Job Guarantee"". 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"

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 claim, “100% Job Guarantee”, 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 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:"A-One gold TMT bars"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"It is an advertisement which showcases the company's thermex tmt iron bars used for construction. It tries to showcases the strength of the rods. We from schooldays have learnt from disaster management classes that we are suppose to get out of the building and run towards a clear space or take cover under a strong furniture in the time of an earthquake. But here, the ad showcased, implies contradictory to the values that need to be followed. It tries to imply that there is no necessity to take cover during the event based on the construction material. Since this is not acceptable methodology, I would like to request you to review the complaint and take action accordingly."

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the concerned Media (Writemen Media Private Limited) for their assistance in providing the contact details of the advertiser, or to forward the grievances of the complainant to the advertiser. The CCC noted that no response was received from the advertiser or from the concerned media prior to the due date. The CCC viewed the TVC and noted that the characters shown in the TVC do not make any attempt to follow the precautions required to be taken in case of an earthquake. In the absence of response from the concerned media and comments from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the TVC while attempting to portray strength of their product, manifests a disregard for safety. The TVC contravened Chapter III.3 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

COMPANY:"Bennett Coleman & Co Ltd"
PRODUCT:"TimesPro"

COMPLAINT:

“90% + Placement Record”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"I have come across the following unethical advertisement in the print media. Advertisement of the Times of India Group published in the Times of India on 04.07.2017 at page 3 ""90% + PLACEMENT RECORD"" I enclose the paper cuttings and request you to look into the matter."

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’s response provided a summary table showing that in 2014-16 batch the total number of students were 19, number of students placed were 18, not placed was 1, totalling to 94.73%. Advertiser stated that the claim for placement record is based on relevant data and past records. Advertiser further argued that the complainant has approached a forum which has otherwise no jurisdiction qua print media and he/she choose to not avail the right forum i.e. Press Council of India. ASCI has no power to censure newspapers / print media as expressly explained by Hon’ble High Court of Bombay in Century Plyboards Ltd. Vs. ASCI, 2000 (1) Bom CR 136. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the advertiser’s response. Regarding the advertiser’s comment on ASCI’s jurisdiction, the CCC referred to the 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 advertiser did not declare the total number of students passing out from the placed class in their advertisement. The advertiser states “Placement record” however beyond providing the numbers in a table format, has not provided any evidence for the current batch or past batches such as the detailed list of students who have been placed through their Institute, contact details of students for independent verification, enrolment forms and appointment letters received by the students, or any independent audit or verification certificate for the specific claim. The CCC concluded that the claim, “90% + Placement Record”, was not substantiated and the claim is misleading by omission and exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Clauses 4 (a) and (e) of ASCI 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:"Truweight Wellness Pvt Ltd"
PRODUCT:"Truweight"

COMPLAINT:

"Times of India Delhi pGe 10 9th august. 1st 10 days free, top line see results in 10 days Or urmoney back. Total misleading advertising"

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 is a promotional offer, which clearly specifies that 10 days will be free only when the customer buys some weight loss programs. It’s not a total free thing. They do not promise any guaranteed weight loss in 10 days and result does not mean drastic weight loss, it could mean increased energy, better feeling, less body pain and some weight loss. 10 days is like a trial period, in which if customers do not see any benefit, they can opt out of the program and ask for refund. As claim support data, the advertiser provided a copy of “Honest Expectation letter” that is signed by each of their customers as part of this program. The CCC scrutinized the advertisement as well as the Honest Expectation offer letter and observed that there were some discrepancies in the terms and conditions stated in the offer letter which make the advertised claim non-tenable. Point 12 of the terms and conditions of the offer letter states that the advertiser gives seven days Money Back Guarantee. If the customer does not like the program he/she can return the Super Food Kit and get the money back and after seven days, no claims for refunds can be entertained. Point 9 states that some might lose inches and not lose kgs initially, after few weeks of the program it will start showing results. Based on this data, the CCC concluded that the claim, “See Results in 10 days or your money back” appearing with the headline “Kickstart your weight loss today”, was not substantiated with any supporting evidence of the customers who were refunded with the fees back, and is misleading by ambiguity and implication. The claim, “Get your first 10 days free”, when read in conjunction with the claim “Get 10 day Detox worth Rs.3000 free with weight loss programs”, is contradictory and misleading by ambiguity and implication, as the offer is actually not free but subject to the customer buying the package. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.""

COMPANY:"Universal Group Of Institutions"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“Best engineering college for academic excellence & placements.”

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 in the absence of any comments or response from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “Best engineering college for academic excellence & placements” was not substantiated with any verifiable comparative data of the advertiser’s institute and other similar institutes, or through a third party validation. The claim was 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 UPHELD."

COMPANY:"Abhilashi Group of Institutions"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“No.1 institution of HP”

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 in the absence of any comments or response from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “No.1 institution of HP”, was not substantiated with any verifiable comparative data of the advertiser’s institute and other similar institutes, or through a third party validation. The claim was misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement was 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:"Lakshya- (Association of Chartered Certified Accountant (ACCA) Global)"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"1. 100% assurance for Job opportunity. 2. 100% Job opportunity"

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 in the absence of any comments or response from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims, “100% assurance for Job opportunity” and “100% job opportunity”, were not substantiated with data to show the job offers/opportunity provided to their students. Furthermore, the CCC considered the use of “100%” numerical 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 UPHELD."

COMPANY:"Accurate Institute of Management & Technology"
PRODUCT:"Accurate Group of Institutions"

COMPLAINT:

“Best Management institute for 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 in the absence of any comments or response from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “Best Management institute for 100% Placement”, was not substantiated with any verifiable comparative data of the advertiser’s institute and other similar institutes, and 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. 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 UPHELD."

COMPANY:"Acharya Institutes "
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“Ranked 1”

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 in the absence of any comments or response from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “Ranked 1”, was not substantiated with any verifiable comparative data of the advertiser’s institute and other similar institutes and a copy of the ranking as claimed in the advertisement and the methodology for the ranking. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

COMPANY:"Aero Institute of Technology"
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 while the advertiser may be offering placement assistance to students ,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:"Akbar Academy of Airline Studies"
PRODUCT:

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. The advertiser had stated in their response that their institute has a proven track record of providing 100% Jobs to its enrolled students. So far all the students enrolled with them are placed in reputed organisations. The CCC observed that the advertiser’s response has only assertions about their institute and the training packages offered by them but no substantiation or verifiable data has been provided by the advertiser. Upon carefully viewing the print advertisement, examining the complaint and the response given by the advertiser, the CCC concluded that while the advertiser may be offering placement assistance to students, 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 Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was accordingly UPHELD."

COMPANY:"Alpha Group of Educational Institutions"
PRODUCT:"Alpha College of Engineering & Technology"

COMPLAINT:

“100% placement for the 4th consecutive year.”

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 for the 4th consecutive year”, was not substantiated with authentic supporting data of the last four years 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 UPHELD."

COMPANY:"Amity Global School"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“CIE is the world's largest provider of international qualifications”

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 claim made is factually correct as per the official website of Cambridge International Examinations, which states that CIE is the world’s largest provider of international education programmes and qualifications for 5 to 19 year olds. Upon carefully viewing the print advertisement, examining the complaint and the response given by the advertiser, the CCC observed a discrepancy in the wordings mentioned in the reference quoted (‘Cambridge International Examinations is the world’s largest provider of international education programmes and qualifications for 5 to 19 year old.”) and the claim made in the advertisement, “CIE is the world's largest provider of international qualifications”. The CCC concluded that the claim in the advertisement is misleading by ambiguity and omission. 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:"Art Forte"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“100% scholarship.”

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 Nanyang Academy of Fine Arts (NAFA) does provide for full waiver of tuition fee via NAFA's scholarships which is specifically evident from NAFA's Course Guide (Diploma and Degree Programmes 2017/18). As claim support data, the advertiser provided a copy of the relevant pages of the said guide. The CCC observed that this data was inadequate to substantiate the claim made in the advertisement when seen in conjunction with the visuals of students referred to in the advertisement. Furthermore, the reference to 100 % scholarship and its placement in the advertisement was misleading by ambiguity and omission that the scholarship is being referred to is of NAFA and not for their institute. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

COMPANY:"Atlantis International Academy"
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 while the advertiser may be offering placement assistance to students, 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:"Aviral Classes"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“Classes that provide the maximum selections from North India”

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, “Classes that provide the maximum selections from North India”, was not substantiated with verifiable claim support data, comparison with other similar institutes 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 UPHELD."

COMPANY:"BSC Publishing Co. Pvt. Ltd"
PRODUCT:"Banking Services Chronicle Academy"

COMPLAINT:

“India’s No.1 Banking/ SSC Coaching Institute Since 1993”

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 said advertisement was not published by them but by their Jamshedpur franchisee. Advertiser further stated that they are instructing their franchisee not to use the claim objected to in their future advertisements. On ASCI’s request, the advertiser provided a copy of the warning letter issued to their franchisee. The CCC viewed the advertisement and considered the advertiser’s response. In the absence of claim support data, the CCC concluded that the claim, “India’s No.1 Banking/ SSC Coaching Institute Since 1993”, 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. The claim is 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:"Capella Maritime Career Institute"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“100% success record.”

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. Upon viewing the advertisement, and in the absence of any response or comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “100% success record”, was not substantiated with verifiable claim support data for the current year or previous time periods for which the advertiser was offering their services, and is misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

COMPANY:"Central Footwear Training Institute"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“100% placement assisted.”

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 during the year 2016-17, the advertiser is the only Govt. organisation to provide highest placement to rural youths and this fact is partially revealed through their print media by using the words ""100% placement Assisted"" in place of the word ""97% placement assurance"". As this response was inadequate without the relevant claim support data, ASCI requested the advertiser to provide enrolment forms of the students for academic year 2016-2017, and Offer letters and contact details of the students placed by their institute. In response to this request, the advertiser provided placement details of 23rd batch of Diploma in Footwear Design & Production, 1st batch of Post Graduate Higher Diploma in Footwear Technology, 6th batch of Post Graduate Diploma in Footwear Technology, and 18th batch of Certificate in Footwear Technology. Upon carefully viewing the print advertisement, examining the complaint and the response with the supporting data given by the advertiser, the CCC observed that the advertiser did not provide data pertaining to enrolment forms and appointment letters received by the students, nor any independent audit or verification certificate. The CCC concluded that the claim, “100% Placement assisted”, was inadequately substantiated. The CCC further concluded that while the advertiser may be offering placement assistance to students, the use of 100% numerical is not relevant for “placement assisted” 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 Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.""

COMPANY: "Chandigarh Group of Colleges"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“CGC Jhanjeri is honoured with prestigious award for Quality in Placements by ABP News.”

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. Advertiser did not provide a copy of this particular award/certificate as claimed in the advertisement. The CCC noted that the Advertiser did not provide the details of the process as to how the selection was done i.e. survey methodology, details of survey data, criteria used for evaluation, questionnaires used, names of other similar colleges that were part of the survey and the outcome of the survey. 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: "Cleopatra Beauty Academy"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“100% job 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. The advertiser had stated in their response that the claim made clearly means that those who will be enrolled for the courses will be assisted and guided in finding the jobs available in the market. The CCC viewed the advertisement and considered the advertiser’s response. The CCC concluded that while the advertiser may be offering job assistance to students, the use of 100% numerical is not relevant for “job 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: "Dheya IAS"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“Most trusted since 2003.”

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, “Most trusted since 2003”, was not substantiated with verifiable supporting comparative data over the last 14 years, and 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 UPHELD."

COMPANY:"Dr Bhatia Medical Coaching Institute"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"“No.1 PG Medical Coaching Institute of India.”"

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, “No.1 PG Medical Coaching Institute of India”, 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 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: "Dr M.G.R Polytechnic College"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“Immediate 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, “Immediate Job Opportunity”, was not substantiated with verifiable supporting data to show the job offers/opportunity provided to each of their students immediately after passing out through their institute. 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 UPHELD."

COMPANY: "Sakthi Medical Trust-"
PRODUCT:"Dr Nallini Institute of Engineering & Technology"

COMPLAINT:

“100% placement through campus interview.”

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 responded stating that the advertisement under complaint was not published by them but was created by their Ad. Agency. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and in the absence of specific comments and claim support data from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “100% placement through campus interview”, 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 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: "E-Careerpluz Info (India) Pvt Ltd"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“India's no.1 leading technical training Institute.”

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, “India's no.1 leading technical training Institute.”, 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 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: "Expert Institute of Advance Technology Pvt. Ltd"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"1. India’s No.1 training Institute. 2. 100% job & business support"

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 claim, “India’s No.1 training Institute”, was not substantiated with any verifiable comparative data of the advertiser’s institute and other similar institutes, or through a third party validation, and is misleading by exaggeration. The claim, “100% job & business support”, 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 independent verification, enrolment forms and appointment letters received by the students, nor any independent audit or verification certificate to prove 100% jobs being offered. Also, the claim 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:"Flying Queen Air Hostess Academy"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“100% job 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. The advertiser had stated in their response that the content specifying “100% job assistance” simply denotes that their placement team endeavors in providing 100% assistance in placing their students in companies/institutions. Upon carefully viewing the print advertisement, examining the complaint and the response given by the advertiser, the CCC concluded that while the advertiser may be offering job assistance to students, the use of 100% numerical is not relevant for “job 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:"GLA University"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“No.1 Private University of Uttar Pradesh as per news 24 & C-Voter survey 2015.”

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, “No.1 Private University of Uttar Pradesh as per news 24 & C-Voter survey 2015”, was not substantiated with details of the process as to how the selection was done i.e. survey methodology, details of survey data, criteria used for evaluation, questionnaires used, names of other similar colleges that were part of the survey and the outcome of the survey. 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 UPHELD."

COMPANY:"GMS-MAVMM Polytechnic College"
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 UPHELD."

COMPANY:"S. Amar Singh Educational Charitable Trust"
PRODUCT:"GNA University"

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 UPHELD."

COMPANY:"GOAL Educational Services Pvt. Ltd"
PRODUCT:"Goal Coaching"

COMPLAINT:

"1. India's No.1 Institute in Result Ratio 2. Upto 100% scholarship”"

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 claim, “India's No.1 Institute in Result Ratio”, 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. The claim is misleading by exaggeration. Claim, “Upto 100% scholarship”, was not substantiated with supporting evidence of 100% scholarships availed by any of their students, and was misleading by implication and ambiguity regarding the amount of scholarship and the total number of scholarships being offered. 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:"Geetha Shishu Shikshana Sangha (GSSS Institute of Engineering &Technology for Women)"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“100% training & 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. The advertiser had stated in their response that all students admitted in their engineering college go through rigorous training programme exclusively designed for placements and all of them are assisted for placements after training. Upon carefully viewing the print advertisement, examining the complaint and the response given by the advertiser, the CCC observed that the advertiser’s response has only assertions about the training program provided by their institute for placement but no details of the same. The CCC did not find the claim of “100% training” to be objectionable but linking it with “placement assistance” was considered to be misleading. While the advertiser may be offering placement assistance to students, 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 ambiguity and 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: "Gupta Classes"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“100% Result”

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% Result”, was not substantiated with verifiable supporting data, and 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 UPHELD."

COMPANY:"Hitech Mobile Repair Learning Centre"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“India's No.1 mobile repair learning centre.”

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, “India's No.1 mobile repair learning centre”, 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. The claim is misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

COMPANY:"Career Point Kota"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“The most successful institute in Bilaspur since 2005”

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, “The most successful institute in Bilaspur since 2005”, 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 for period starting year 2005. The claim is 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: "IANT Computer Education"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“100% job assurance”

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 assurance”, was not substantiated with supporting data, and is misleading by implication 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: "IIKM Business School"
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 while the advertiser may be offering placement assistance to students, 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:"Indus International School"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“100% Placement in top universities.”

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 advertiser’s institute has had 5 batches of students passing out of the education program - BDP and from the second batch of students they have successfully placed all grade 12 students in various universities in India & Abroad. The advertiser’s response provided a summary table giving break-up of grade 12 students who passed out/graduated country-wise and list of some of the Top Ranking Universities and colleges where their students have been placed. As this response was inadequate without the relevant claim support data, ASCI requested the advertiser to provide enrolment forms of the Students (year wise), appointment letters from Universities, and the contact details of the students who have been placed by their institute. In response to this request, the advertiser responded stating that all students apply to various international universities through the university application portals, hence the enrolment forms from these students would only be available with the universities they had applied to and was not available with them. The appointment letters / admission confirmation letters are sent directly by the university to the respective students, or through the portals of universities or email to their registered personal email ids. Thus, the appointment intimations are not maintained at the school. Advertiser further provided contact details of the students for the 2015-16 and 2016-17. Upon carefully viewing the print advertisement, examining the complaint and the response with the supporting data given by the advertiser, the CCC observed that the advertiser did not provide authentic supporting data such as enrolment Forms of the Students (year wise), appointment letters from universities received by the students, nor any independent audit or verification certificate. The CCC noted that the advertiser did not declare the total number of students passing out from the placed class in their advertisement. The CCC concluded that the claim, “100% Placement in top universities”, was inadequately substantiated and is misleading by exaggeration. The print advertisement contravened Clauses 4 (a) and (e) of 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:"J.R. Media Institute"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"1. Best Media Institute. 2. 100% Placement Assistance”"

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 claim, “Best Media Institute”, was not substantiated with verifiable supporting data, and is misleading by exaggeration. The CCC noted that while the advertiser may be offering placement assistance to students, 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 Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

COMPANY:"Jai Bharath Educational Foundation"
PRODUCT:"Jai Bharath College Of Management And Engineering Technology"

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 noted that while the advertiser may be offering placement assistance to students, 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:"Jawaharlal Nehru Institute of Arts & Science (JNIAS)"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“100% campus 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 noted that while the advertiser may be offering placement assistance to students, the use of 100% numerical is not relevant for “campus 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:"JD Institute of Fashion Technology"
PRODUCT:

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 the claim made is self explanatory that the institute is giving service of “placement assistance” i.e. giving help for getting job. They are able to provide help/assistance to all their students and hence the claim does not tantamount to any objectionable/misleading content. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the advertiser’s response. The CCC concluded that while the advertiser may be offering placement assistance to students, 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:"Kailash Institute"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“100% placement of all previous batches.”

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 of all previous batches”, was not substantiated with authentic supporting data such as detailed list of students who have been placed through their Institute, batch wise details, 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 UPHELD."

COMPANY:"Kautilya Academy"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“No.1 Institute of State”

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, “No.1 Institute of State”, 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. The claim is 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:"Zee Interactive Learning System"
PRODUCT:"Kidzee Pre School"

COMPLAINT:

“Asia’s largest preschool chain.”

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, “Asia’s largest preschool chain.” was not substantiated with any verifiable comparative data / survey data of the advertiser’s institute and other similar institutes, or any third party validation to prove this claim. The claim is misleading by exaggeration and omission of the reference to the source of this data. The advertisement contravened the Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1, I.2 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

COMPANY:"Lakshya CA Campus"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"1. “No.1 Chartered Accountancy Institute in India. 2. 100% placement assistance”"

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 claim, “No.1 Chartered Accountancy Institute in India”, 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. The claim is misleading by exaggeration. The CCC noted that while the advertiser may be offering placement assistance to students, 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 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:"Lotus Tecwins"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“Job Assurance Provided.”

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, “Job Assurance Provided”, was not substantiated with verifiable supporting data and is misleading by exaggeration 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 UPHELD."

COMPANY:"Madhav University"
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 UPHELD."

COMPANY: "MIET Group of Institutions"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“100% placements over last 3 years.”

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 over the past three years, on an average, the number of placements has been more than the graduating strengths of their students. Numerically, average comes out to be more than 100%, yet they maintained writing 100 percent placements. As claim support data, the advertiser provided MBA Placement Report for Batches 2015, 2016 and 2017, and student list. As this response was inadequate without the relevant claim support data, ASCI requested the advertiser to provide Enrolment Forms of the students for the last 3 years, Offer letters for all students placed, and contact details of the students who have been placed by their institute. In response to this request, the advertiser responded stating that the student list sent to ASCI are the students who were enrolled with their affiliating University (i.e. Dr. APJ Abdul Kalam Technical University, Lucknow). Verification of these students can be done online with the help of University website (http://erp.aktu.ac.in/WebPages/OneView/OneView.aspx). The offer letters and phone numbers of students cannot be provided as this data is personal and confidential. Upon carefully viewing the print advertisement, examining the complaint and the response with the supporting data given by the advertiser, the CCC observed that the advertiser did not provide 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. The CCC noted that the advertiser did not declare the total number of students passing out from the placed class in their advertisement. The CCC concluded that the claim, “100% placements over last 3 years”, was inadequately substantiated and is misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Clauses 4 (a) and (e) of the ASCI 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:"MIPS Institute"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“100% Assured 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% Assured Job”, was not substantiated with authentic supporting data 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. 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 UPHELD."

COMPANY: "Mody University of Science and Technology"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“Upto 100% scholarship on tuition fee for top 50 qualifying students”

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, “Upto 100% scholarship on tuition tee for top 50 qualifying students”, was not substantiated with supporting evidence of 100% scholarships availed by any of their students, or the evidence of provisions made by the advertiser to grant the mentioned scholarships and was misleading by implication and ambiguity regarding the amount of scholarship and the total number of scholarships being offered. 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: "New Science Degree And PG College"
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 noted that while the advertiser may be providing placement assistance to their students, 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:"Oasis Educational Services Pvt. Ltd."
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“Upto 100% scholarship.”

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 response by way of an affidavit declaring “that as per the advertisement which has given as 100% scholarship for candidates of the institution only provides and applicable to students to be concluded institution fees, waiver, discount tuition fees and extra it will not be reward to the candidates.” Upon carefully viewing the print advertisement, examining the complaint and in the absence of claim support data, the CCC concluded that the claim, “Upto 100% scholarship”, was not substantiated with supporting evidence of 100% scholarships availed by any of their students, provision made by the institute to grant such scholarship and was misleading by ambiguity and omission of information regarding the amount of scholarship and the total number of scholarships being offered and the criteria used for the same. 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:"Paramveer Academy "
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“India's best defence training institute.”

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, “India's best defence training institute”, was not substantiated with verifiable comparative data / market survey data of the advertiser and other similar institutes, and that the claim 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:"Rajalakshmi School of Business (Rajalakshmi Institutions)"
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. 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: "Rajasthan Defence Academy"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“947 selections which is highest in India.”

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, “947 selections which is highest in India”, was not substantiated with verifiable supporting data, and 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 UPHELD."

COMPANY:"Ravis Education System"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“100% passing guarantee or else fee return.”

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% passing guarantee or else fee return”, was not substantiated with supporting data for 100% passing record of their students and / or any supporting evidence of the students who were refunded with the fees back if they did not pass. The claim 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 UPHELD."

COMPANY: "Rustomjee Academy for Global Careers Pvt. Ltd"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“100% job guarantee”

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 Guarantee”, 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 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:"Sri Narayana Educational Institution-"
PRODUCT:"Sahodaran Ayyappan Memorial College of Education"

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. The advertiser had stated in their response that with regard to the claim made they actually meant proper directive and assistance to all B.Ed. students who pass out of their institution. It is not a false information as it doesn't mean assurance of jobs to all students. They further 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 noted that while the advertiser may be providing placement assistance to their students, 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:"Shail Group of Institutions"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“Scholarship up to 100%.”

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 words “Scholarship up to 100% and condition apply” are indicative of the intent of the management to encourage meritorious students by offering various categories of scholarship depending on the level of excellence they have achieved. This scholarship, being a scholarship of excellence, is offered in addition to the eligible category of students in SC/ST/OBC. The scholarship scheme in print media advertisement in a generic form to say scholarship upto 100% is available for excelling in academics and sports and “condition apply” meant that percentage of scholarship is dependent on different eligible criteria. As this response was inadequate without the relevant claim support data, ASCI requested the advertiser to provide evidence of Scholarships availed by their students in the past. In response this request, the advertiser provided list of first year engineering students of 2016-17 who were awarded academic scholarship. Advertiser in their additional response provided a brief summary in tabulated form to show that Rs 21.80 lakh of academic scholarship was disbursed to engineering students during 2016-17. Upon carefully viewing the print advertisement, examining the complaint and the response with the supporting data given by the advertiser, the CCC observed that the advertiser has self certification about the scholarship disbursed by them. However, this not being an audited statement validated by an independent audit or verification certificate, the CCC did not consider it to be acceptable. The CCC concluded that the claim, “Scholarship up to 100%”, was inadequately substantiated. The claim is misleading by omission of the mention that 100% scholarship covering only Tution fees is applicable for students with >90% marks and omission of the mention of where the detailed terms and conditions are available for reference to students. 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 UPHELD.""

COMPANY:"Sri Nanesh Samta Vikas Trust"
PRODUCT:

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. The advertiser had stated in their response that that claim was printed by mistake and they have modified the advertisement and removed the clam objected to. Upon carefully viewing the print advertisement, examining the complaint and the response given by the advertiser, the CCC noted that while the advertiser may be offering placement assistance to their students, 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:"Universal College Of Engineering"
PRODUCT:

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. The advertiser had mentioned in their response that the Institution has offered assistance to the students for 100% placement. It implies that there would be efforts on the part of Institution to find out job opportunities for the students enrolling in this Institution. They only ensure 100% sincerity and there is no offer for 100% placement made. The CCC viewed the advertisement and considered the advertiser’s response. The CCC concluded that while the advertiser may be offering placement assistance to their students, 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: "Vijnan Institute Of Science And Technology"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"“1. 100% Placement Assistance. 2. Scholarship worth Rs.2 Crore”"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"M"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 placement drives are conducted in their college, and companies from India and abroad are selecting employable candidates from their institute. This wide range of placement assistance imparted by them to all their students is result oriented since these students are getting job opportunities in India & abroad. As for the claim of “Scholarship worth Rs. 2 crore”, the advertiser stated that they have 300 sanctioned seats for B. Tech courses in five branches. Out of this 150 seats are under Govt. quota. having 75 seats with fee @ of Rs 50000/- and balance 75 seats @ Rs 75000/- amounting to Rs 9375000/-. Out of the balance 150 seats 105 are management seats having a fee @ Rs 124000/- and 45 seats are under NRI quota with a fee @ Rs 175000/- amounting Rs 20895000/-. The total fee that can be collected from students as per Govt. approved fee for 2017-18 is Rs 30270000/- The institute after considering various confinement in engineering admission, has decided and announced scholarship of Rs 2 crore this year. Considering the merit of each case, every student is awarded this scholarship. As this response was considered inadequate without the relevant claim support data, ASCI requested the advertiser to provide exhaustive response with supporting data for the claims made. Advertiser did not provide their submission in time for the CCC meeting. Upon viewing the print advertisement, examining the complaint and the response given by the advertiser, the CCC concluded that - Claim - “100% Placement Assistance” - The CCC concluded that while the advertiser may be providing placement assistance to their students, 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. Claim - “Scholarship worth Rs.2 Crore” – The CCC observed that the advertiser has only made assertions about the scholarships being offered. No criteria or basis for the scholarship was given. The claim was not substantiated with supporting evidence of scholarships availed by any of their students. The claim is misleading by ambiguity regarding the amount of scholarship and the total number of scholarships being offered. For the calculations shown in their response, the Advertiser did not provide any independent audit or verification certificate for the same. 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:"Alpha College Of Engineering"
PRODUCT:"Alpha College Of Engineering"

COMPLAINT:

“Academic year 2016-2017 all students placed”

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 2017 batch had 241 students. Of these 229 were interested in campus placement, 12 students were not interested in getting placed, 30 recruiters through on campus, and 6 recruiters off campus interviews, some students got multiple offers, and one got 3 offers. Advertiser provided a summary table showing Placement Record of 2017 Batch. As this response was inadequate without the relevant claim support data, ASCI requested the advertiser to provide Enrolment Forms of the students for academic year 2016-2017, Offer letters with contact details of all the students placed by their institute. Advertiser did not provide this data in time for the meeting. Upon carefully viewing the print advertisement, examining the complaint and the response given by the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “Academic year 2016-2017 all students placed”, 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. The CCC noted that the advertiser did not declare the total number of students passing out from the placed class in their advertisement. The claim is misleading by omission and exaggeration. The print advertisement contravened Clauses 4 (a) and (e) of ASCI 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: "ASEL English Learning Centre"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“No.1 consistently from 20 years”

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 post the due date. The advertiser had stated in their response that they started English coaching in 1997 with only one centre at Bilaspur and now they are the biggest English coaching centre of Bilaspur. Looking to their dedicated and committed service, the Government has entrusted them to provide free basic computer education to the students belonging to the poor and downtrodden sections of the society. Upon viewing the print advertisement, examining the complaint and the response given by the advertiser, the CCC observed that the advertiser’s response has only assertions about their institute, but did not provide any supporting data. In the absence of claim support data, the CCC concluded that the claim, “No.1 consistently from 20 years”, 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 for the current year or the past 20 years. The claim is 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: "BPJ College of Arts and Science"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“Done Guinness World Records”

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 they had done the Record for 'Longest Painting using Natural Grains" for the year 2006-2007 in their institution. However, the advertiser did not provide any supporting data for the claim made. In the absence of claim support data, the CCC concluded that the claim, “Done Guinness World Records”, was not substantiated with supporting evidence and is misleading by omission of the reference to the specific record and 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:"Kanchan Shikshan Sansthan (Kanchan Devi Girls College)"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“100% job oriented degree & diploma courses”

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 100% job oriented courses provided by their institute are approved by government of Rajasthan and affiliated to M. D. S. University, Ajmer. Advertiser’s response mentioned list of courses provided by their institute. The advertisement was published to make people aware about the same courses so that the maximum people can get benefited. Advertiser did not provide any supporting data for the claim made. In the absence of claim support data, the CCC concluded that while the courses being offred may be job oriented, the use of 100% numerical is not relevant for “job oriented degree & diploma courses” claim. The use of “100%” as a descriptor in the claim is misleading by implication. The advertisement contravened the Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapter I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

COMPANY:"Godrej Consumer Products Ltd"
PRODUCT:"Godrej No. 1 Soap"

COMPLAINT:

“Claims to have 3/4th turmeric, sandal and other natural ingredients”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat which they availed via telecon. Subsequently, the advertiser submitted their written response. The advertiser had stated in their response that the advertisement differentiates the product from many other soaps of their competitors as 3/4th of its ingredients are natural and differentiates from their own similar Grade 1 soaps, being a turmeric and sandal variant. The product is a Grade 1 soap having 76% total fatty material (TFM). Since vegetable oils are used as TFM which is derived from natural ingredients, the product claims of having 3/4th natural ingredients. The claim is collective and does not speak about turmeric or sandal selectively. The advertisement provides the relevant details i.e. Grade 1 soap and turmeric & sandal variant in an artistic manner but without emphasising on turmeric or sandal in isolation. As claim support data, the advertiser provided composition details of blend used as TFM, and copy of Indian standard toilet soap – BIS specification. The claim support data submitted by the advertiser was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC examined the complaint, viewed the TVC and the response sent by the advertiser as well as the opinion of Technical expert presented at the meeting. The CCC observed that the advertiser has made assertions that theirs is a Grade 1 soap which has 76% TFM (Total fatty Matter) and that the oils they have used are derived from vegetable sources so are completely natural, hence the claim is valid. They have not provided any evidence that their soap indeed has 76% TFM, nor any evidence has been provided to indicate how much turmeric, sandal and other natural ingredients are present in the soap. The CCC concluded that the claim, “Godrej No.1 mein hai teen chauthai haldi, chandan aur anya prakrutik tatva……”, was inadequately substantiated. The audio of the TVC as well as the supers appearing in the TVC are misleading giving an impression that the predominant / significant ingredients in the product are turmeric and sandal. The TVC contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

COMPANY: "Ayurwin Pharma Pvt Ltd."
PRODUCT:"Nutrislim Plus Range Of Products"

COMPLAINT:

"1. For easy slimming Nutrislim Plus Powder and Capsule is the most effective ayurvedic method. 2. Approved by Department of Ayush"

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 claim, “For easy slimming Nutrislim Plus Powder and Capsule is the most effective ayurvedic method”, was not substantiated with evidence of product efficacy. The CCC noted that Claim, “Approved by Department of Ayush”, was challenged under complaint reference no.1704-C.71 which was Upheld by the CCC and it is a continued non-compliance by the advertiser. The print advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.""

COMPANY: "Naturoveda Health World"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"India's most Trustworthy and Confident healthcare service providing organization in the field of natural medicine”

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 in the year 2016, Naturoveda Health World was selected by Hakim Ajmal Khan Memorial Society in recognition of their treatment procedure and its effectiveness in providing treatment for chronic diseases. They have declared Naturoveda as the Safest Healthcare Destination. The CCC observed that for this specific complaint, the advertiser did not provide a copy of this particular award/certificate as claimed in the advertisement. The CCC noted that the Advertiser did not provide the details of the process as to how the selection was done i.e. survey methodology, details of survey data, criteria used for evaluation, questionnaires used, names of other similar institutes that were part of the survey and the outcome of the survey. Furthermore, the CCC had concerns about the authenticity and credibility of the body awarding such certificate that included absolute claims such as “Safest Healthcare Destination” without making any thorough assessment of similar such institute offering their services. Upon carefully viewing the print advertisement, examining the complaint and the response given by the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, ""India's most Trustworthy and Confident healthcare service providing organization in the field of natural medicine”, was not substantiated, and is misleading by gross exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was accordingly UPHELD.""

COMPANY: "Ayurwin Pharma Pvt Ltd."
PRODUCT:"Nutrigain Plus Range Of Products"

COMPLAINT:

""1. Skinny to Fit Body 2. Approved by Ayush Dept.""

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 claim, “Skinny to Fit Body”, was not substantiated with evidence of product efficacy. The claims are misleading by exaggeration. The print advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was accordingly UPHELD."

COMPANY: "Glenmark Pharmaceuticals Ltd."
PRODUCT:"Skalpe+ Shampoo"

COMPLAINT:

"1. Switch to SCALPE + anti-dandruff shampoo, the total dandruff solution for lasting relief from all your dandruff related problems 2. Scalpe+ Expert Dandruff Shampoo 3. 5 Xpert Benefits –Anti Dandruff, Anti Recurrence, Prevents itching, flaking & scaling, Prevents hair fall, conditioning. 4. A picture of Dr. Tia Sharma is shown as an expert recommending Scalpe+ anti-dandruff shampoo. 5. *As per the study published in International Journal of Cosmetic Science. 6. As long as shampoo is used: Due to dandruff, to be used in 3 days for 4 weeks and once a week thereafter as maintenance therapy."

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"Our objections: 1. Claim 1 to 4 needs to be substantiated by independent studies and research data. 2. What is meant by ‘total dandruff solution’? Explain. It implies that after using this product, there will be no dandruff problems. This needs to be substantiated and certified by a competent independent authority. 3. Picture and name of the doctor is shown recommending the product’. Promotion of any product and recommending it is against the Guidelines and MCI, Code of Ethics Regulations 2002, which state that - a physician shall not give any approval, recommendation, endorsement or certificate with respect of any therapeutic article, or any commercial product. 4. Exaggerated claims are made in the advt by showing a professional doctor. It is misleading and creates undue influence on buyers. 5. Is the doctor shown in the advt a real doctor or a model posing as a doctor? 6. Celebrities, for the purpose of ASCI guideline, are those people who are from the field of Entertainment and Sports and would also include other well-known personalities like Doctors, Authors, Activists, Educationists, etc. who get compensated for appearing in advertising. 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 claim made by the doctor in this advt violates this clause of the ASCI guidelines. 7. According to us, the advertisement contravenes Chapter 1.1,1.2 and 1.4 of ASCI code."

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 submitted their written response. The advertiser had stated in their response that Scalpe+ shampoo has Ketoconazole (2%) and Zinc Pyrithione (l %). It is an established fact that Ketoconazole targets the root cause of dandruff which is Malassezia fungus. By inhibiting the growth of Malassezia fungus, it provides lasting relief from dandruff and dandruff related problems such as itching/flaking/ scaling; recurrence and hairfall. Studies have revealed that combination of Zinc Pyrithione and Ketoconazole has a potential for synergistic action on the dandruff causing fungus because of their different mechanisms of action. The product has a formulation that makes use of both these ingredients (Ketoconazole 2% and Zinc Pyrithione 1%) thereby lending it a higher order of efficacy against dandruff as compared to any commonly available anti-dandruff shampoo. Use of the shampoo in accordance with the regime provides lasting relief from dandruff and all dandruff related problems. Scalpe+ is doctors most recommended anti-dandruff shampoo. This is evident from the fact that it has received highest number of prescriptions which is validated by an independent body - IMS Health Information and Consulting Services India Pvt. Ltd. The picture of the doctor shown in the advertisement is for representation purpose only and is not intended to be a real person. As claim support data, the advertiser provided several published studies as a support for the claim that Scalpe+ prevents hair fall due to dandruff, product license, and sample of the product. 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’s response supports the claims of anti dandruff shampoo, anti-recurrence, prevents itching, flaking and scaling. Reduction of inflammation can reduce hair fall. The CCC concluded that the claims, “Switch to SCALPE + anti-dandruff shampoo, the total dandruff solution for lasting relief from all your dandruff related problems”, “Scalpe+ Expert Dandruff Shampoo”, “5 Xpert Benefits –Anti Dandruff, Anti Recurrence, Prevents itching, flaking & scaling, Prevents hair fall, conditioning”, when read in conjunction with the qualifier “*As per the study published in International Journal of Cosmetic Science”, “As long as shampoo is used: Due to dandruff, to be used in 3 days for 4 weeks and once a week thereafter as maintenance therapy”, were substantiated. These complaints were NOT UPHELD. The CCC observed that the advertisement shows a creative depiction of a doctor, used for representation only. In view of the fact that the product is also receiving highest number of prescriptions, such depiction was not considered to be objectionable. This complaint was NOT UPHELD.""

COMPANY: "Jolly Healthcare "
PRODUCT:"Jolly Fat Go Slimming Powder"

COMPLAINT:

"1. Control your increasing weight. 2. Now you'll always be slim smart and fit, with delicious remedies."

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"1. Claims 1 and 2 need to be substantiated with data from independent scientific studies. 2. How can one lose weight by only taking Fat-Go slimming powder, Capsule or Oil? 3. How can a consumer always be slim, smart and fit? What is the definition of slim, smart and fit? This is misleading the consumer by means of implications. 3. Are three products- Fat-go slimming powder, capsule and oil meant for different purposes? If yes, then this is an omission in advt. Please explain. 4. Are all the three products necessarily to be taken for the treatment? If yes, this is omission in the advertisement. Please explain. 5. The advt. promotes the product by joining slim figure to smartness and fitness, which is misleading. As slim, smart and fit are independent to each other, 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 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, “Control your increasing weight”, “Now you'll always be slim smart and fit, with delicious remedies” were not substantiated with the details of the product, its mechanism of action and evidence of product efficacy for the powder, capsule and oil being advertised and are misleading by gross exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

COMPANY: "N.K Proteins Pvt. Ltd."
PRODUCT:"Tirupati Cooking Oil"

COMPLAINT:

"1. Tirupati Cottonseed Oil is India’s # 1. 2. Tirupati oil adds the amazing flavor of happiness. 3. Savour the real taste of love and special taste of Tirupati"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"Claim 1 needs to be substantiated with independent data. The details of the study/survey based on which the claim “Tirupati Cottonseed Oil is India’s # 1 is made, needs to be mentioned in the advt. According to us, the advertisement contravenes Chapter 1.1 and 1.4 of ASCI code Action to be taken: We propose immediate withdrawal of the advt."

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 via telecon. Subsequently, the advertiser submitted their written response post the due date. As claim support data, the advertiser provided a Certificate from Nielsen and Cotton seed top players data for July 2017. The claim support data submitted by the advertiser was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC examined the complaint, viewed the print advertisement and the response sent by the advertiser as well as the opinion of Technical expert presented at the meeting. The CCC observed that the certificate from Nielsen, confirmed that Tirupati Cottonseed Oil ranked first in Value for the 12 months period ending July 31, 2017 with a 31.1% share of the Cottonseed segment of the Refined Edible Oils (consumer packs) market. This data is for All India covering both urban and rural areas. According to the data provided by the advertiser, the next largest brand in the cottonseed oil segment had a share of only 12.4%. Considering a relatively large period of one year (ending July 31, 2017), Tirupati Cottonseed Oil is the largest cottonseed oil in the Refined Edible Oils (Consumer Packs) segment in terms of value, according to Nielsen’s Retail Index Service. The CCC concluded that the claim, “Tirupati Oil is India’s # 1 cottonseed oil”, was substantiated. However, the claim was misleading by omission as it is not qualified to mention the source and date of research and the criteria that this is applicable for Consumer packs market. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.2 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. This complaint was UPHELD The claims, “Tirupati oil adds the amazing flavor of happiness”, and “Savour the real taste of love and special taste of Tirupati”, were considered to be generic and were not objectionable. This complaint was NOT UPHELD.""

COMPANY: "G. D. Foods MFG. (India) Pvt. Ltd –"
PRODUCT:"Tops Classic No Onion No Garlic Sauce"

COMPLAINT:

""The advertisement claims - ""Health Secrets of Classic NONG Sauce: • It is a rich source of vitamin A that helps in keeping your eyes healthy. • It can help in reducing the risk of prostate cancer. • It is low in fat, thus good for your health” The said Advertisement unsubstantiated, unsupported and uncorroborated health and nutrition claims which are likely to mislead the consumer. 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 eyesight. The Advertiser has not substantiated as to how, in what manner, and to what extent Classic No Onion No Garlic Sauce helps in preventing prostate cancer, and maintaining good eyesight. 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 bene fit, 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 ""low 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 NCD [non-communicable diseases]. Given the above fact, claim on maintaining good eyesight should not be made on product like sauce. Hence, a sweeping statement as made by the Advertiser on its website, without any substantiation whatsoever is misleading and wrongful on part of the Advertiser. It is submitted that the Advertiser is claiming that Classic No Onion No Garlic Sauce has benefits like preventing cancer etc. Such exaggerated, unsubstantiated, and unfounded claims are likely to mislead the consumers into believing that Tops Classic No Onion No Garlic 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 eyesight 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 NONG Sauce: It is a rich source of vitamin A that helps in keeping your eyes healthy, It can help in reducing the risk of prostate cancer, It is low in fat, thus good for your health”, 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: "Sresta Natural Bioproducts Pvt.Ltd"
PRODUCT:"24 Mantra Whole Wheat Atta"

COMPLAINT:

"“Maa makes the tastiest rotis in the world. We make sure world's healthiest atta goes into her rotis”. “Sresta works with '45,000 passionate farmers who produced the most nutritious whole wheat in the most productive lands of Rajasthan”. “If that wasn't enough our team of field experts ensures the organic integrity of the farmer's produce with over 1 million farm visits every year. All so that we can provide mom the best atta her best rotis truly deserve”."

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

""Sresta has launched a new advertisement campaign wherein they make various unsubstantiated claims regarding their atta that unfairly and adversely affects the perception of other brands of atta in the market, including ours. Snapshots of the relevant advertisement have been annexed (Annexure 1), and we would draw attention to the following claims that have been made: (a) The advertisement states 'Maa makes the tastiest rotis in the world. We make sure world's healthiest atta goes into her rotis.’ It is submitted that the claim of 'world's healthiest atta' is unsubstantiated, and is clearly made with the aim of representing the atta product marketed by Sresta as being healthier than any other atta available in the market, and unfairly causes an adverse perception of all other atta brands in the minds of the consumer. Further, a mere perusal of the nutritional information panels of popular atta brands in the market show that there is very little variance between the nutrition contained in the atta product marketed by Sresta and other attas in the market. The packs of a few other atta brands in the market is annexed for your reference (Annexure 2). The claim is only being made to unfairly influence the mindset of consumers, and is made with absolutely no substantiating disclaimer or documentation. The advertisement states that Sresta works with '45,000 passionate farmers who produced the most nutritious whole wheat in the most productive lands of Rajasthan'. There is no substantiation provided for the number of farmers with whom they interact, and no substantiation of the claim that these farmers produce the 'most nutritious whole wheat' - this claim is highly prejudicial to all other atta brands as it causes an adverse perception in the minds of the consumers that other atta brands use whole wheat that isn't necessarily nutritious. In fact, the pack label of their atta product states '20,000 farmers' (there too without substantiation), and therefore it is clear that Sresta is attempting to mislead consumers. A copy of the pack label is annexed Annexure 3) for your reference. The advertisement states that 'If that wasn't enough our team of field experts ensures the organic integrity of the farmer's produce with over 1 million farm visits every year. All so that we can provide mom the best atta her best rotis truly deserve.' - this is made without substantiation. Further, no link has been established regarding how sourcing from a large number of farmers and field visits results in 'the best atta' being manufactured. The process of manufacturing packaged atta involves many steps, and sourcing is only one of them. Assuming without conceding that the whole wheat sourced by Sresta is of a high quality, they are still making the claim of producing 'the best atta' without any substantiation or documentation regarding the integrity of their manufacturing processes.""

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 five days to submit their reply. The advertiser had stated in their response that they grow organic food by choice. Their wheat is grown by using traditional farming methods and is organically cultivated. The absence of synthetic pesticide residues and inorganic heavy metals, farmer's care, complete supervision of the entire process and strict adherence to international certifications makes organic food and their whole wheat atta healthier. 43947 number of farmers are directly associated with Sresta's Organic farmer groups. There are other farmer groups apart from this number who are doing dedicated production for Sresta for crops like sugarcane, millets and spices. These are managed by third party vendors with whom they have annual contracts. Thus Sresta works with more than 45000 number of farmers. These farmers are inspected by Sresta's field staffs regularly and audited by third party certification agencies which are accredited by APEDA. As part of this process their more than 200 field personnel visits these farms regularly. The 1 million visits which they have mentioned in the campaign covers for all the crops/products managed by Sresta. Approximately each one of Sresta Field staff covers 15 farmers a day on the lower side, for 25 days and 12 months, this accounts to more than 1 million visits annually. As claim support data, the advertiser provided scientific research papers / reports published in various journals regarding benefits of organically produced food, copy of product license, and sample of the product. 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 comparison of Nutrition Fact Table on various product packs enclosed as annexures by the complainant shows that the nutrition profile of 24 Mantra Organic Whole wheat atta is not superior to that of Pillsbury, Ashirvad, or Annapurna atta. No evidence has been provided by the advertiser comparing their product versus key competitors in the market to prove superiority of their products versus other players in the terms of impact on health or nutrition. The CCC concluded that the claims, “we make sure world’s healthiest atta goes into her rotis”, “Sresta works with 45,000 passionate farmers who produced the most nutritious whole wheat in the most productive lands of Rajasthan” and “All so that we can provide mom the best atta her best rotis truly deserve”, were inadequately substantiated and are misleading by exaggeration. The advertiser indicates in their response that the 1 million visits refers to visits for all the crops/products managed by Sresta. However, the communication /pack copy gives the impression that the 1 million farm visits are only to farms that produce wheat which is used to make the whole wheat atta. The claim, “If that wasn’t enough our team of field experts ensure the organic integrity of the farmer’s produce with over 1 million farm visits every year”, was considered to be misleading. The 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 Soya Sauce"

COMPLAINT:

""The advertisement claims - ""Health Secrets of Soya Sauce: • Its antimicrobial properties help in protecting the body against certain bacteria. • It is low in fat content and is a very good source of Vitamin C, iron and manganese. • It is a rich source of sodium that helps in basic bodily functions. The said Advertisement unsubstantiated, unsupported and uncorroborated health and nutrition claims which are likely to mislead the consumer. The Advertiser is giving the benefits of soya sauce. However, it is submitted that there are no conclusive studies to prove that soya sauce helps in preventing bacterial maladies. The Advertiser has not substantiated as to how, in what manner, and to what extent Soya Sauce helps in preventing bacterial maladies. The Advertiser has not mentioned the exact proportion of 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 ""fighting against certain bacteria"" 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. Hence, a sweeping statement as made by the Advertiser on its website, without any substantiation whatsoever is misleading and wrongful on part of the Advertiser. It is submitted that the Advertiser is claiming that Soya Sauce has benefits like fighting bacteria etc. Such exaggerated, unsubstantiated, and unfounded claims are likely to mislead the consumers into believing that Tops Soya 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 fighting certain bacteria, being a good source of various nutrients like manganese, iron 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 and fighting infections.""

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 Soya Sauce: Its antimicrobial properties help in protecting the body against certain bacteria. It is low in fat content and is a very good source of Vitamin C, iron and manganese. It is a rich source of sodium that helps in basic bodily functions”, 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: "Guduchi The Ayurvedism"
PRODUCT:"Obesidat"

COMPLAINT:

"1.Obesidat - A natural way to be slim which gives permanent solution and we found The Obesidat. 2.The Product Name implies cure for obesity and claims in the advertisement make a reference to obesity and are misleading by implication."

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

""Obesity- Item no- 39 Schedule J Item No- 38-DMR Schedule""

COMPANY: "Gloss Pharmaceuticals Pvt. Ltd. "
PRODUCT:"Vaeg Capsules And Oil"

COMPLAINT:

""1. The use of Vaeg gives long lasting vigour. 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.""

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

""Maintenance or improvement of the capacity of the human being for sexual pleasure. DMR Section 3(b) Item no. 36- Schedule J""

COMPANY: "Raman Ayurvedic Cancer Society"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"Successful treatment of Cancer and Kidney"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

""Cancer- Item No- 6- DMR Schedule Item No- 8- Schedule J Stones in kidney, gall bladder,bladder. Item no. – 22- DMR Schedule Item no. – 50 – Schedule J""

COMPANY: "Aas Piles Clinic "
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"Get rid of piles from the roots without operation and bed rest"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"Get rid of piles from the roots without operation and bed rest"

COMPANY: "G. M. Pharmacy "
PRODUCT:"Sadabahar Sugar Free"

COMPLAINT:

"1. The powder that destroys diabetes- Freedom from Sugar. 2. Sadabahar Powder generates insulin in complete amount and kills diabetes."

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

""Diabetes- Item no. 9- DMR Schedule Item no. 14 – Schedule J""

COMPANY: "Dr Azad Herbal Centre"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"Get rid of piles from the roots forever."

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

""Piles- Item No.- 42 -Schedule J""

COMPANY: "Stimox Capsule "
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"1.For Happy Marital Life Stimox Capsule. 2.Stimox Stimulated Excitement"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

""Maintenance or improvement of the capacity of the human being for sexual pleasure. DMR Section 3(b) Item no. 36- Schedule J""

COMPANY: "Dr N Dharmarajan Hospital"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"1. Irregular Menstruation Period, Fibroid, Polycystic Ovary Syndrome, Fallopian Tube Block, these diseases can get cured. 2. Thousands of patients live happily after being cured without surgery. 3. Fertility Assured"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

""Disorders of menstrual flow Item no. 13-DMR Schedule Diseases and disorders of the uterus Item no. 12-DMR Schedule Item no.15-Schedule J Sterility in Women Item No.48- DMR Schedule""

COMPANY: "Shree Baidyanath Ayur Bhawan Pvt. Ltd."
PRODUCT:"Baidyanath Vita Ex Gold Plus"

COMPLAINT:

"1.Making Life More Exciting 2.Now for both Men and Women 3. The visual in the Ad and product packaging 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. DMR Section 3(b) Item no. 36- Schedule J""

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

COMPLAINT:

"1. Brings hope and enthusiasm in Love. 2. Amazing Formula which removes out physical weakness. 3. The visual in the ad read in conjunction with the claims objected to implies that the product is meant for sexual pleasure enhancement."

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

""Maintenance or improvement of the capacity of the human being for sexual pleasure. DMR Section 3(b) Item no. 36- Schedule J""

COMPANY: "Dr. Taj"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"Successful treatment of venereal disease."

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

""Venereal diseases including syphilis, gonorrhea, soft chancre, venereal granuloma and lymphogranuloma- Item no. 54- DMR Schedule""

COMPANY: "Janta Clinic"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"1. Avoid operation and give successful treatment of piles through injection. 2. Patients of Fistula get successful treatment through Kshar Sutra"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

""1. Avoid operation and give successful treatment of piles through injection. 2. Patients of Fistula get successful treatment through Kshar Sutra""

COMPANY: "Jivak Ayurveda"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"1. Treatment of Cancer is possible without Operation, Radiation and Chemotherapy through Ayurvedic Method. 2. Patients suffering from piles , kidney related diseases can get complete ayurvedic solution."

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

""Cancer- Item No- 6- DMR Schedule Item No- 8- Schedule J Piles and Fistulae Item no. 42-Schedule J Stones in kidney, gall bladder,bladder. Item no. – 22- DMR Schedule Item no. – 50 – Schedule J""

COMPANY: "Vaidyaratnam P.S. Variers Kottakkal Arya Vaidyasala"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"Effective treatment of diseases like Diabetes, Jaundice, Paralysis, Spondylitis, Asthma, Arthritis etc…"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

""Diabetes- Item no. 9- DMR Schedule Item no. 14 – Schedule J Jaundice Item no. 33-Schedule j Paralysis Item no 39-DMR Schedule Item no. 40-Schedule J Spondylitis Item no. 48- Schedule J Bronchial Asthma Item no. 7- Schedule J Rheumatism Item no. 43-DMR Schedule""

COMPANY: "Care and Cure Herbals"
PRODUCT:"Shots Capsules and Gel"

COMPLAINT:

"1. The beautiful moments of love will always be remembered. 2. The visual in the ad read in conjunction with the claim objected to implies that the product is meant for sexual pleasure enhancement."

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

""Maintenance or improvement of the capacity of the human being for sexual pleasure. DMR Section 3(b) Item no. 36- Schedule J""

COMPANY: "Bengali Dawakhana"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"1. Save yourself from operation , successful treatment of Piles. 2. Patients suffering from Fistula and Fissure get successful treatment"

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

""Piles and Fistulae Item no. 42-Schedule J""

COMPANY: "Birla Healthcare Ayurveda Pvt. Ltd."
PRODUCT:"Birla Ayurveda"

COMPLAINT:

"Get freedom from disorders like Paralysis, Spondylitis, Obesity, Infertility"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

""Paralysis Item no 39-DMR Schedule Item no. 40-Schedule J Spondylitis Item no. 48- Schedule J Obesity- Item no- 39 Schedule J Item No- 38-DMR Schedule Sterility in Women Item No.48- DMR Schedule""

COMPANY: "Sri Balaji Ayurvedic Clinic"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"Removal of Kidney Stones without operation."

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

""Stones in kidney, gall bladder,bladder. Item no. – 22- DMR Schedule Item no. – 50 – Schedule J""

COMPANY: "Kunnath Pharmaceuticals Pvt. Ltd."
PRODUCT:"Musli Power Range of Products"

COMPLAINT:

"1.MUSLI POWER PREMIUM (For Senior Citizen) - Claims to be useful to increase strength and stamina. 2.MUSLI POWER EVE (For Women) - Claims to be useful to increase strength, stamina and improve general well being and vitality. 3. The visual on the product packaging read in conjunction with the claims objected implies that the product is meant for sexual pleasure enhancement."

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

""Maintenance or improvement of the capacity of the human being for sexual pleasure. DMR Section 3(b) Item no. 36- Schedule J""

COMPANY: "Shivansh Ayurveda"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"1. Increase Physical Strength. 2. Ayurvedic medicine which brings melowness in husband and wife relationship. 3. The visual in the ad when read in conjunction with the claims objected to implies that the product is meant for sexual pleasure enhancement."

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

""Maintenance or improvement of the capacity of the human being for sexual pleasure. DMR Section 3(b) Item no. 36- Schedule J""

COMPANY: "Manoj Ayurveda Hospital and Research Center"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"Perfect ayurvedic solution to Piles , Fissure ,Fistula with no need of operation"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"Piles and Fistulae Item no. 42-Schedule J"

COMPANY: "Chaturbhuj Pharmaceutical Company"
PRODUCT:"Right Sugar Tablet"

COMPLAINT:

"1. diabetes control is possible 2. sugar management medicine."

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

""Diabetes- Item no. 9- DMR Schedule Item no. 14 – Schedule J""

COMPANY: "Herbsayurmed Pharmaceuticals"
PRODUCT:"Ajmod Ras and Ajmod Extract Dried"

COMPLAINT:

"easy and natural solution for sugar control and obesity."

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

""Diabetes- Item no. 9- DMR Schedule Item no. 14 – Schedule J Obesity- Item no- 39 Schedule J Item No- 38-DMR Schedule""

COMPANY: "Siddhar Diabetic Foundation"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"The diseases which come due to diabetes like unhealed ulcers, less marital life interest all will be cured."

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

""Ulcers of the gastrointestinal tract Item no. 53-DMR Schedule Maintenance or improvement of the capacity of the human being for sexual pleasure. Item no. 36- Schedule J""

COMPANY: "Star Ayurveda"
PRODUCT:"Star Homeopathy"

COMPLAINT:

"Liver related problems recognised foremost can be cured easily"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

""Liver Disorders Item no. 33-Schedule J""

COMPANY: "Homeocare International Pvt. Ltd."
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"Asthma can be completely cured ."

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

""Bronchial Asthma Item no. 7- Schedule J""

COMPANY: "Sanjivani Ayurvedic"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"Ayurvedic Remedy, Guaranteed Treatment- Obesity, Paralysis,Piles, Stones, Infertility and Venereal Diseases"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

""Obesity- Item no- 39 Schedule J Item No- 38-DMR Schedule Paralysis Item no 39-DMR Schedule Item no. 40-Schedule J Piles and Fistulae Item no. 42-Schedule J Stones in kidney, gall bladder,bladder. Item no. – 22- DMR Schedule Item no. – 50 – Schedule J Sterility in Women Item No.48- DMR Schedule Venereal diseases including syphilis, gonorrhea, soft chancre, venereal granuloma and lymphogranuloma- Item no. 54- DMR Schedule""

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

COMPLAINT:

"1. Tagline translated as “My heart goes crazy for you”. 2.Use of Stay-On will give you a feeling of youthfulness, immunity power, pep, excitement, strength and vigour physically and mentally. 3. 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. 3.The advertisement provides link to website (https://www.stayonpowercapsule.com/stay-onpowercapsule.; ) 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. DMR Section 3(b) Item no. 36- Schedule J""

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

COMPLAINT:

"1. The magic of intimacy remains constant. 2. You will get a feeling of youthfulness, immunity power, pep, excitement, strength and vigour physically and mentally. 3.The visual in the ad and product packaging read in conjunction with the claims objected to implies that the product is meant for the enhancement of sexual pleasure. 4.The advertisement provides link to website (https: //www.stayonpowercapsule.com/stay-onpowercapsule. 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."

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

""Maintenance or improvement of the capacity of the human being for sexual pleasure. DMR Section 3(b) Item no. 36- Schedule J""

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

COMPLAINT:

"1. increases vigour, strength and stamina 2. The visual in the Advertisement and product packaging read in conjunction with the claim in the advertisement implies that the product is meant for enhancement of sexual pleasure. 3.The advertisement provides link to website ( ; http://playwincapsule.com/playwin-capsule.html ) which refers to ,”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. DMR Section 3(b) Item no. 36- Schedule J""

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

COMPLAINT:

"1 Increases excitement, strength, extra timing and pep. 2. Helpful in preventing premature ejaculation. 3.For powerful stamina. 4. The visual in the ad read in conjunction with the claims objected to implies that the product is meant for sexual pleasure enhancement."

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

""Maintenance or improvement of the capacity of the human being for sexual pleasure. DMR Section 3(b) Item no. 36- Schedule J Premature Ejaculation, Sexual Impotence Item no- 47- Schedule J""

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

COMPLAINT:

"1. Increases vigour, strength and pep. 2. For powerful stamina. 3. The visual in the ad read in conjunction with the claims objected to implies that the product is meant for sexual pleasure enhancement"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

""Maintenance or improvement of the capacity of the human being for sexual pleasure. DMR Section 3(b) Item no. 36- Schedule J""

COMPANY: "Curles and Curves- Hair Transplantation and Cosmetic Surgery Centre"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"1. A Scientific solution on obesity. 2. Permanent solution for obesity 3. The claims in the advertisement make a reference to obesity and are misleading by implication."

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

""Obesity- Item no- 39 Schedule J Item No- 38-DMR Schedule""

COMPANY: "Apollo Hospitals Enterprise Limited (Apollo Hospitals)"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"1. Get rid of seizures. 2. Let us eliminate Epilepsy."

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

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

COMPANY: "Shree Paramhans Skin and Hair Regrouth Centre"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"1.Get rid of baldness in 2 hours. 2. Without Surgery and Medicine 3.Throufh natural treatment and yoga get back your lost hair. 4. The before and after visuals in the ad appear to be misleading."

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

""Baldness Item no. 5 – Schedule J""

COMPANY: ""Shalby Limited (Shalby Hospitals)""
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"Successful experience of providing treatments to more than 50,000 cancer patients."

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

""Cancer- Item No- 6- DMR Schedule Item No- 8- Schedule J""

COMPANY: "ETA General Pvt "
PRODUCT:"O General AC"

COMPLAINT:

"1. Worlds first air conditioner with upto 80 feet air flow 2. R410A Eco friendly refrigerant 3. Powerful airflow 25 meters 4. 52 degree Celsius 5. Tropical innovation series 6. Dual suction"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

""1. How does the product claim to be World’s first air conditioner with upto 80 feet air flow? This claim needs to be substantiated and certified by a competent independent authority. Is this unique to this brand? 2. The ad then claims to have powerful airflow – 25 meters. There needs to be consistency in the claims made about the same feature 3. What is meant by ‘R410A – Eco friendly refrigerant’? 4. What is meant by tropical innovation series? Is it unique to this brand? How different is it from other air conditioners? 5. What is meant by dual suction? Is it unique to this brand? How different is it from other air conditioners? 6. Claims 1‐6 need to be substantiated with independent research data. According to us, the advertisement contravenes Chapter 1.1, 1.2 and 1.5 of ASCI code”""

Recommendation: UPHELD

""The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. However, in the absence of response 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. Advertiser requested for an extension of 30 days to submit their response, to which the ASCI granted an extension of five days to provide their comments on the complaint. Subsequently, the Advertiser submitted their written response. Advertiser in their response stated that according to their internal research at the time of launching this product, no other brand had claimed the feature of 25m airflow. There is no independent study on this made available neither there is any standard testing procedure for airflow measurements. R410A, which is a HFC based refrigerant poses no harm to the Ozone layer because, unlike CFCs and HCFCs, they do not contain Chlorine and hence it has Zero Ozone Depletion Potential. It does not deplete the Ozone layer when released into the atmosphere. Hence R410A is referred to as an environmentally friendly refrigerant or eco-friendly. The Tropical Innovation Series is designed and developed to meet the requirement of cooling at high temperatures, at the same time being environment friendly and energy efficient. Keeping these market demands in mind, the advertiser had developed a line of innovative products titled “Tropical Innovation Series” which is unique to the brand. Dual Suction is a product design of the Indoor Unit to optimise airflow, to enable maximum air contact with the evaporator coil. The Tropical Innovation Series by Fujitsu General is designed for performance at higher ambient temperatures as high as 52 degrees celsius. As claim support data, the advertiser in their response provided a summary table giving details of Cooling Capacity Test as per IS 1391 (Part 1 & Part 2) and Power Consumption Test as per IS 1391 (Part 1 & Part 2) of indoor and outdoor temperature. Advertiser also provided cooling capacity test report, Live demonstration video of 25m Airflow, and TV News footage of 25m Airflow telecast by TV9 news channel. The claim support data provided by the advertiser was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response as well as the opinion of the Technical expert presented at the meeting. The CCC observed that - Claims – “Worlds first air conditioner with 80 ft flow” and “Powerful airflow 25 meters” - Advertiser has given a video demo showing air flow at a location marked 25m. 25m is indeed approximately 80 ft. There is no certificate from any agency conducting the test, also no details provided regarding the model which was being tested or about the distances in question. Both these cannot be ascertained from the video. The cooling capacity sheet has no information on this either. This sheet also bears no details of who is certifying the test. It does show numbers indicating that the AC functions even when external temperature is as high as 52C. The standard test for air flow from an air conditioner is specified in IS1391 section 14 and is about air velocity at the nozzle, mass flow of air and nozzle velocity pressure which is considered sufficient indicators for air flow. As a result there is no mention of testing existence of air movement at 25m or any such distance. Testing it as shown in the video does not satisfy the requirement of a standard air flow test. The CCC concluded that the claims, “with 80 ft flow”, and “Powerful airflow 25 meters”, were inadequately substantiated and are misleading by exaggeration. Claim, “Worlds first” was not substantiated with any verifiable comparative data of the advertiser’s product and other competitor products, or any third party validation, and is misleading. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The earlier recommendation of complaint being Upheld stands on re-examination. Claim – “R410A ecofriendly refrigerant” - R410A is a zeotropic mixture of difluoromethane and pentafluoroethane. These are HFC compounds considered better than CFCs but not the most eco-friendly as refrigerants. The advertiser has mentioned that R410 has zero Ozone Depletion potential which is true. However, it has a Global Warming Potential which is about 1700 to 2000 times carbon dioxide. Hence it is not exactly a great solution for eco-friendly refrigerant. Hydrocarbons, carbon dioxide and ammonia have better GWP. (While ammonia at high concentrations can be toxic, hydrocarbons are inflammable and carbon dioxide usage requires high pressure which has its own hazards). Even amongst the HFC compounds which have zero ODP, there are other options (such as R134a) which have a lower GWP than R410A. Hence R410A is not the best option as a eco-friendly refrigerant. However, R410A is one of the better options and relatively better than CFCs and HCFCs. So the claim, “R410A ecofriendly refrigerant”, is substantiated. This complaint was Not Upheld on re-examination. Claim – “52 degree Celsius” - The IS1391 specifies standard test conditions for refrigeration performance as outdoor temperature of 35C as mentioned by the advertiser. The same standard also mentions the maximum test condition as outdoor temperature of 46C and a wet bulb temperature of 27C. The Cooling Capacity sheet given by the advertiser shows operating power consumption of the product at 52C outdoor temperature which is about 10 to 20% higher than at standard conditions. This would have been sufficient to show that the product works at those conditions if the test mentioned how many hours it was conducted for and it was certified by a standard agency. In the absence of both it is only a weak and non-standard indication of the capability of the product to work at an outdoor temperature of 52C. Also, there is no indication of the wet bulb temperature of outdoor air in this Cooling Capacity sheet. The claim, “52 degree Celsius”, was inadequately substantiated. The earlier recommendation of complaint being Upheld stands on re-examination. Claim - “Tropical innovation series” was a name for the product range and was not considered to be objectionable. This complaint was Not Upheld on re-examination. Claim – “Dual Suction” – the air conditioner has room air inlet from about the front panel as well as below the front panel. The cooled air is thrown out in between these two places. This can be called as 'dual suction' as it sucks air from top as well as below. This complaint was Not Upheld on re-examination.""

COMPANY: "Sony Pictures Networks India Pvt. Ltd"
PRODUCT:"Kaun Banega Crorepati"

COMPLAINT:

"The ad shows people being teased because of lack of money. I feel that advertisement is an insult to humanity where it values an individual on materialistic aspects of life"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: NOT UPHELD

""The ASCI had approached the advertiser (production company - Big Synergy Media Limited) 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 through their distributors (Sony Pictures Networks India Pvt. Ltd). The advertiser had stated in their response that the promotional campaign depicts various slice-of-life situations where individuals are bogged down by difficult questions of life wherein their only hope lies in changing their destiny with the power of knowledge. Advertiser further argued that the television series and promotional campaigns thereof are clearly covered under the provisions relating to programmes and not advertising. Upon carefully viewing the TV promo, examining the complaint, and the response given by the advertiser, the CCC noted that ASCI code's definition of Advertising states that ""Any communication which in the normal course would be recognised as an advertisement by the general public would be included in this definition even if it is carried free-of-charge for any reason."" Therefore TV promos which do not include content of the program in its communication, too, is considered as Advertising and in ASCI’s purview. The CCC observed that the TV promo advertisement was for an upcoming programme `Kaun Banega Crorepati’ in which children are not meant to participate. The CCC was of the view that it was not relevant to show a child being ridiculed in this TV promo. However, the CCC concluded that in the context of a TV promo for a game show, the situations shown where one individual is let down by another for their lower socio-economic class and the promo further suggests that those individuals could choose to change their current situation, are not likely to cause grave and widespread offence. The complaint was NOT UPHELD." "

COMPANY: "Shreejee Honey (I) Pvt. Ltd"
PRODUCT:"Shreeji Ashtamrut"

COMPLAINT:

""I enclose herewith an Ad of Shreeji Ashtamrut published in Divya Bhaskar, Vadodara ,dt. 16/7/2017. The Ad says the product is available at all medical, ayurvedic and provision stores and a mobile no.9586322535 is given. My objections are as follows: 1) Ad says product is liquid base useful in more than 500 diseases. The product is based on eight main ingredients Ginger (Adrak), Amla, Tulsi, Ardusi, Phudina, Lemon, Honey, and Sugar. Special product for controlling diabetes is also available. 2) Following diseases are mentioned in the AD- Vaat, Pitt, Cold, Cough, Gas, Acidity, Monthly Cycle Pain, Vomiting, Kaf, Nautia, Constipation, Blood Pressure, Breathing Problems, Obesity, Allergy, Blood Purification, Sexual Stamina Improver. 3) The Ad contravenes ASCI code ch.1 , cl.1,4 4) There are no proofs, no reference to any literature study to prove usefulness of this product for more than 500 diseases. Kindly look into the above objections, call for company 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. 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 (in Gujarati) as translated in English, “product is liquid base useful in more than 500 diseases”, claims implying that the product is “useful in Vaat, Pitt, Cold, Cough, Gas, Acidity, Monthly Cycle Pain, Vomiting, Kaf, Nautia, Constipation, Blood Pressure, Breathing Problems, Obesity, Allergy, Blood Purification, Sexual Stamina Improver”, and “Special product for controlling diabetes is also available”, were not substantiated with any technical data, scientific rationale or clinical evidence of product efficacy, and are misleading. Claim, “The product is based on eight main ingredients Ginger (Adrak), Amla, Tulsi, Ardusi, Phudina, Lemon, Honey, and Sugar”, was not substantiated with supporting data showing presence of these ingredients in the product, and is misleading. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

COMPANY: "Torque Pharmaceuticals"
PRODUCT:"JAL Natural Mineral Water"

COMPLAINT:

“From the Foothills of Himalayas”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"The claim- “From the Foothills of Himalayas” is false and concocted"

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 through their Advocates. The Advocate on behalf of the advertiser stated in their response that their client is using the tagline/slogan `From the Foothills of Himalayas’, as the source of water used in JAL natural Mineral Water is a Borewell, which is located in the Baddi, District Solan of the State of Himachal Pradesh. The district Solan and also the borewell (which is source of water) is geographically situated in the Shiwalik Range of Himalayas. The bottling unit of JAL Natural Mineral Water is situated in the range of the Shiwalik Hills, which is in fact known as Foothills of Himalayas. The natural mineral water which is the content of the product JAL is sourced and filled at the Foot Hills of Himalayas. In support of this response, the advocate provided a copy of Wikipedia reference of Indian Himalayan Region. Upon carefully viewing the print advertisement, examining the complaint, and the response given by the Advocate, the CCC concluded the claim, “From the Foothills of Himalayas”, was not objectionable as the advertiser is mentioning the geographical location of the source of water. The complaint was NOT UPHELD." "

COMPANY: "InterGlobe Aviation Limited"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"I enclose herewith an Ad of IndiGo published in Divya Bhaskar, Vadodara, dt. 4/8/2017. My objections are as follows 1. In 2nd para of AD it is mentioned IndiGo is the largest airline in the country with 136 aircraft that take off more than 900 times a day. In 11 years company has helped people make more than 185 million journeys to 46 destinations in India and abroad. 2. Company claim of being largest airline in the country needs proofs for substantiation from Govt / Semi. Govt. organizations. 3. Company claim of taking off more than 900 times a day with 136 aircraft gives and an average of 6.6 take offs for every aircraft. In 24 hours atleast 7 take offs for every flight from take-off to destination including waiting for passengers to board and unboard. This seems to be impossible under the present circumstances. This may be possible for any particular route, but any generalisation for every aircraft out of fleet of 136 aircraft, on routes in India and abroad, can make it impossible. Company must explain. 4. Company claim of 185 million journeys in 11 years makes an average of 170 lakh journeys in a year. With 360 days in a year this comes to average of 52800 journeys in a day. Even 900 take offs in a day with 136 aircrafts is impossible, how can company make 52800 journeys in a day? Company tries to prove their claim of largest airline in the country, but has failed in their presentation of facts and figures. Please look at my above objections, call for company reply and then decide on my complaint. Kindly keep me informed."

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 had stated in their response that the claims made are based on various reports published by the Director General of Civil Aviation (DGCA). The Domestic Traffic Report published by DGCA dated August 18, 2017 for the month of July, shows that IndiGo has a market share of 38.7% making it the largest airline in the country. As per the report of DGCA dated July 20, 2017, lndiGo had 135 aircraft, post which additional three aircraft were added. The maximum aircraft in the fleet of any other Indian airline as per the aforementioned DGCA report is 123 aircraft (in the fleet of Air India Limited). The DGCA's report titled Yearly Air Transport Statistics dated July 2017 states that in the month of June 2017, lndiGo had a total of 25,778 domestic departures and, 1561 international departures, making it a total of 27339 departures in the month and 911 departures daily. As per the DGCA's data, for the limited period between 2009 till July 2017, the number of passengers flown by lndiGo is 184,816,027. Further as per the DGCA's reports available on its website the number of passengers flown by IndiGo during the period April 2015 to July 2017, is 93,082,842 which makes it a total of more than 193 million passengers till July 2017. As claim support data, the advertiser provided copies of Domestic Traffic Report – DGCA - July17, IndiGo – Prospectus November 2015, Yearly Air Transport Statistics for IndiGo – DGCA - 2015, 2016 and July 2017. 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 -- Claim of being the largest airline in the country – the Domestic Traffic Report prepared by the Directorate General of Civil Aviation provides data on the passengers carried among both private as well as public sector carriers for all months of 2017. This indicates that Indigo is the largest airline in terms of the passengers carried. In terms of aircraft owned, Indigo’s website mentions 139 aircraft, Air India website mentions 119, and Jet Airways website mentions a fleet of 113 aircraft. Therefore both in terms of number of domestic passengers carried as well as number of aircraft in their fleet, this claim was substantiated. Claim of ‘taking off’ more than 900 times a day - Based on data provided by DGCA, the average number of departures (both domestic and international) is roughly 900 per day. This claim was not objectionable. Claim of 185 million journeys in 11 years – Advertiser is not making these journeys, they are helping their passengers make these journeys. Based on data from DGCA (http://dgca.nic.in/reports/Traffic-ind.htm), Indigo has carried in excess of 190 million passengers since 2007. The CCC did not consider this claim to be objectionable. The complaint was NOT UPHELD." "

COMPANY: "Volkswagen Group Sales India P. Ltd."
PRODUCT:"Volkswagen"

COMPLAINT:

"In DNA News Paper *(Special Addition) Zgnition page 3, 18th of August. Advertisement highlights Low EMI of 7999/- for Polo version and 11999/- for Vento version. However in entire advertisement they didn't mentioned EMI for how many months. So, Advertisement was incomplete and may be misleading."

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 shows indicative EMI rates for Polo and Vento Trendline variants to which additional terms and conditions apply and the same has been mentioned in the advertisement. The advertisement also states that the consumer should visit authorised dealers for further details because EMI and loan estimate/preference varies from individual to individual and also depends upon the loan eligibility and loan plan opted by any individual. Upon carefully viewing the print advertisement, examining the complaint and the response given by the advertiser, the CCC concluded that though claim of low EMI subject to terms and conditions of the offer are acceptable, the advertiser has not substantiated the basis with calculations for claiming low EMI of Rs.7999/- for Polo version, and Rs. 11999/- for Vento version, in the advertisement nor has given any evidence of such low EMI being availed by any of their customers. Furthermore, the advertisement is misleading by omission of the details regarding the number of months for the EMI payment and the source / web-site details where a customer could look up the EMI calculations. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.""

COMPANY: "Singapore Airlines Limited"
PRODUCT:"Singapore Airlines Limited"

COMPLAINT:

""Singapore Airlines regularly promotes its flights to various cities showing a number in a very large font. Say Rs 47000 all in return for Sydney (as in today's newspaper). I have myself been seeing this for last two month and checking up the various fares as advertised for various cities. However, the moment you actually want to book it the offer is seen to have expired. I have tried this for most of Australian cities almost every time i have seen the advt in newspaper. I have NEVER been able to see a valid offer on the booking site whereas the advertisement continue to shriek and mislead everywhere. The advertisements by Singapore Airlines are outrightly mischievous and fraudulent. These are only put up as a trap for consumers to draw them to their sites where no such product as advertised exists on offer. They misrepresent to consumers as if the offer was available earlier and has has expired now, however , the truth is as discovered by me during my two months long search ,that the advertisements are nothing but an attempt to cheat. Please find enclosed the advertisement which appeared in Delhi edition of The Times of India dated August 17, 2017 (yesterday). It shows flights to Australia from Rs 47000 all-in return. It also, in 6th line from top, highlights Sydney & New South Wales among the cities giving an indication that perhaps flights to these cities are available for that price. Also find enclosed the screenshot of how fares are actually available at the site. As you may see Sydney & NSW are far from 47k. Let’s assume they wanted to refer to the cheapest city in Australia that is Canberra at 47k. After extensive search the lowest we can reach is 49k (see screenshot of various flight schedules). Therefore there is no 47k fare available for entire Australia not just for Sydney / NSW which was intended in the advertisement. My endeavor is that you must make it mandatory for them to make a link on the booking site by clicking which one may straight be led to the flight schedule with lowest fare offer available. In absence of which Singapore Airlines is effectively able to mislead consumers into thinking that the advertised offer may be available somewhere and they are not able to hunt it in their limited desired dates. As you have seen in enclosed files actually there is no 47k offer in reality""

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 had stated in their response that the advertised fare from INR 47,000 was available for travellers on Singapore Airlines flights from Delhi to Sydney and other cities as listed till 31 August 2017. The terms and conditions reflected in the advertisement clearly states this and the fares shown was correct as on 20 July 2017 and subject to change due to currency fluctuations and vary between cities in India. There are other customers who have availed of this same promotional fare of INR 47,000 from Delhi or even slightly lower and bought their tickets either online through their website or through their travel agents. As claim support data, the advertiser provided Ticket copies of two customers who had purchased the advertised fare online, and Ticket copies of two customers who had purchased the advertised fare through travel agent. Upon carefully viewing the print advertisement, examining the complaint and the response given by the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim offer, “Economy Class From Rs. 47,000 All-in return”, was substantiated with evidence of the customers who had availed of this offer. The complaint was NOT UPHELD."

COMPANY: "DAV School Samana"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“World’s largest education organisation.”

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 caption ""World's Largest Organization"" has been used for the parent body of the school, the DAV College Managing Committee, New Delhi and not for DAV School Samana. The DAV schools spread all over India and abroad are an integral part of the umbrella organization, the DAV College Managing Committee, New Delhi. The advertisement in question will reveal that even the logo of the school is not school's own but the logo of the DAV College Managing Committee, New Delhi Estd.1886. As claim support data, the advertiser provided Pamphlet of DAV School Samana, Logo of the DAVCMC New Delhi, and Home Page of School's Website. As this response was inadequate, ASCI requested the advertiser to provide authentic data to substantiate that DAV CMC New Delhi is World’s Largest Organisation. Advertiser did not provide this information in time for the meeting. Upon carefully viewing the print advertisement, examining the complaint and the response with the supporting data given by the advertiser, the CCC observed that the advertiser has made only assertions regarding the claim but did not provide verifiable comparative data to substantiate that the parent body of the school, the DAV College Managing Committee, New Delhi, was the “World’s largest education organization”, nor did they provide any independent audit or verification certificate for the specific claim made. The claim was 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 UPHELD."

COMPANY: "Flywin Academy of Aviation & Vocational Training"
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 while the advertiser may be providing placement assistance to their students, 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: "Jetking Infotrain Ltd"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

""“100% Job Support” “Join India’s No.1 Digital Skills Institute”""

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 at which time, the advertiser sought for an Informal Resolution (IR) of the complaint by withdrawing the claims objected to from their advertisements. However, they did not complete the IR 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 in the absence of claim support data, the CCC concluded that while the advertiser may be providing job support to their students, the use of 100% numerical is not relevant for the claim, “Job Support”. The use of “100%” as a descriptor in the claim is misleading by implication. Claim, “Join India’s No.1 Digital Skills Institute”, 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 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:"Mangalore Institute of Fire & Safety Engineering MIFSE"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“100% Guarantee of 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% Guarantee of Job”, 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 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:"Olive Petals"
PRODUCT:

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 replied requesting for 15 days to submit their response. The advertiser was granted an extension of six days to respond in response to their request for extension. Advertiser did not provide their response by the extended due date. Upon carefully viewing the print advertisement, examining the complaint and in the absence of specific comments from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that while the advertiser may be providing placement assistance to their students, 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:"SIMS Technologies"
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 while the advertiser may be providing placement assistance to their students, 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:"SR Group of Institution"
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 while the advertiser may be providing placement assistance to their students, 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:"Sri Chaitanya Educational Institution"
PRODUCT:"Sri Chaitanya Iit Academy"

COMPLAINT:

"1. Always No.1. 2. Above 80,000 doctors & 10,00,000 engineers produced so far"

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 replied requesting for one month’s time to submit their response. The advertiser was granted an extension of six days to respond in response to their request for extension. Subsequently the Advertiser provided students ranks data for last 7 years of their Institution in support of their claim for 80,000 doctors and 10,00,000 engineers /qualified rankers since inception of the Institution. Upon carefully viewing the print advertisement, examining the complaint and the supporting data provided by the advertiser, the CCC observed that this data was with respect to their students appearing for the entrance examinations and not pertaining to actual number of doctors or engineers passing out of their institute. The CCC concluded that the claim, “Above 80,000 doctors & 10,00,000 engineers produced so far”, was false and misleading by exaggeration. In the absence of any claim support data, the claim, “Always No.1”, was not substantiated with year wise verifiable comparative data versus other similar institutes in the same category or any third party validation or research to prove this claim. 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 UPHELD.""

COMPANY:"S N R Sons Charitable Trust"
PRODUCT:"Sri Ramakrishna Polytech College"

COMPLAINT:

“100% placement for all eligible candidates”

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 for all eligible candidates”, 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 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:"SSN Degree College"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“100% Job Placement Training along with degree courses”

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 Placement Training along with degree courses”, was not substantiated with verifiable supporting data, 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 UPHELD."

COMPANY:"Sudharshana Polytechnic College"
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 UPHELD."

COMPANY:"T D Institute of Professional Studies & Research Rewa"
PRODUCT:"T D Nursing College"

COMPLAINT:

“100% job 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 while the advertiser may be providing job assistance to their students, the use of 100% numerical is not relevant for “job 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:"The Hotel School "
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“100% training and 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 while the advertiser may be providing training and placement assistance to their students, 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 Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

COMPANY:"United Group of Institutions"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"1. Ranked No.1 private engineering college in U.P by Jagran Josh. 2. Recognised by Forbes India as amongst “25 places to study” in India."

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. Advertiser did not provide copy of the particular awards/certificates as claimed in the advertisement. The CCC noted that the Advertiser did not provide the details of the process as to how the selection was done i.e. survey methodology, details of survey data, criteria used for evaluation, questionnaires used, names of other similar colleges that were part of the survey and the outcome of the survey. The credibility and authenticity and name of the certifying bodies was not provided by the advertiser. The CCC concluded that the claims, “Ranked No.1 private engineering college in U.P by Jagran Josh”, and “Recognised by Forbes India as amongst “25 places to study” in India”, were not substantiated with supporting data. The claims are 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 UPHELD."

COMPANY:"UPCIA Industrial Training Centre"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“100% scholarship”.

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 their institute is a private ITI with 52 seats of Computer Operator Programming assistant. UP Govt. has a scheme of 100% Fee reimbursement under Saksham Yojana, which is mentioned in the advertisement. Details can be confirmed on Website www.scholarship.up.nic.in . As this response was inadequate without the relevant claim support data, ASCI requested the advertiser to provide evidence that the students from their institute got 100% Scholarship from UP Govt. under Saksham Yojana, with details of Scholarship and Batch Size, and contact details of the students who had availed Scholarship. Further on the advertiser’s request, they were provided with an opportunity to discuss their submission via telecon, and were subsequently granted five days to submit the supporting data. Advertiser did not provide this data in time for the meeting. The CCC viewed the advertisement and considered the advertiser’s response. The CCC concluded that the claim, “100% Scholarship” is misleading public and is appropriation of a public benefit to private offering. The site provided by the advertiser was not accessible as well and the claim was not substantiated with supporting evidence of scholarships availed by any of the advertiser’s students. The claim is false and misleading by ambiguity and implication. 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:"Viswambhara Educational Society"
PRODUCT:"Vaagdevi Degree & P.G College"

COMPLAINT:

“No.1 in institution in academic placement & sports.”

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, “No.1 in institution in academic placement & sports”, was not substantiated with any verifiable comparative data of the advertiser’s institute and other similar institutes, or through a third party validation. The claim 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:"AISECT University "
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"1. Ranked No.1 private University in central India by careers 360 2. World education award 2016 (Dubai) 3. World education award 2015 4. ASSOCHAM excellence in education award 2014 5. NIELIT award 2014 and Shiksha Ratna award 2012 "

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. Advertiser did not provide copy of the particular awards/certificates as claimed in the advertisement. The CCC noted that the Advertiser did not provide the details of the process as to how the selection was done i.e. survey methodology, details of survey data, criteria used for evaluation, questionnaires used, names of other similar colleges that were part of the survey and the outcome of the survey. The credibility and authenticity and name of the certifying body was not provided by the advertiser. The CCC concluded that the claims, “Ranked No.1 private University in central India by careers 360”, “World education award 2016 (Dubai)”, “World education award 2015”, “ASSOCHAM excellence in education award 2014”, and “NIELIT award 2014 and Shiksha Ratna award 2012”, were not substantiated with supporting data. The claims are 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 UPHELD."

COMPANY:"Amaravathi Business School"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“100% Job 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 while the advertiser may be providing job assistance to their students, the use of 100% numerical is not relevant for “job 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:"Arcot Sri Mahalakshmi Womens College"
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 claim is misleading by exaggeration 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 UPHELD."

COMPANY:"Arka’s Institute of Fashion Designs"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“100% placement assistance”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The 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 prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the print advertisement. In the absence of response from the concerned media and comments from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that while the advertiser may be providing placement assistance to their students, 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:"Birsa Inst Of Tech (Trust) ( BITT Polytechic)"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“Awarded best diploma engineering 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. The CCC viewed the print advertisement. Advertiser did not provide a copy of the particular award as claimed in the advertisement. The CCC noted that the Advertiser did not provide the details of the process as to how the selection was done i.e. survey methodology, details of survey data, criteria used for evaluation, questionnaires used, names of other similar colleges that were part of the survey and the outcome of the survey. The credibility and authenticity and name of the certifying body was not provided by the advertiser. The CCC concluded that the claim, “Awarded best diploma engineering college”, was not substantiated with supporting data. The claim is not qualified to mention the source and date of research and is misleading by omission. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1, I.2 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

COMPANY:"Ajmer Daswani Coaching Classes"
PRODUCT:"Daswani Coaching Classes"

COMPLAINT:

“Best institute for Pre-medical / engineering”

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, “Best institute for Pre-medical / engineering”, was not substantiated with verifiable supporting comparative data / market survey data, and 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 UPHELD."

COMPANY: "Florence College Of Nursing"
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 UPHELD."

COMPANY: "Frankfinn Aviation Service Pvt. Ltd"
PRODUCT:Frankfinn Institute of Air Hostess Training

COMPLAINT:

"1. 100% Job Assistance 2. World's No.1 Air Hostess Training Institute"

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 while the advertiser may be providing job assistance to their students, the use of 100% numerical is not relevant for “job assistance” claim. The use of “100%” as a descriptor in the claim is misleading by implication. Claim, “World's No.1 Air Hostess Training Institute”, was not substantiated with any verifiable comparative data of the advertiser’s institute and other similar institutes in the same category, or any third party validation to prove this claim. The claim is 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: "Hindustan University"
PRODUCT:"Hindustan Institute of Technology and Science"

COMPLAINT:

“Asia’s Most Preferred Technology Institution”

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, “Asia’s Most Preferred Technology Institution”, was not substantiated with verifiable comparative data / market survey data, and is 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:"Horizon Institute Of Accounts and Tax Studies"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“100% Job Assurance”

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 Assurance”, was not substantiated. 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 UPHELD."

COMPANY: "Indian Institute of Airways Training"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“100% Job 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 while the advertiser may be providing job assistance to their students, the use of 100% numerical is not relevant for “job 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: "Future U India Private Limited"
PRODUCT:"Indo - American Montesori Pre-School"

COMPLAINT:

“India's No.1 play school”

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, “India's No.1 play school”, 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 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: "Jagran Social Welfare Society"
PRODUCT:"Jagran Lakecity University"

COMPLAINT:

"1. Upto 100% scholarship in academics and sports 2. 100% placement for 2017 batch"

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 claim, “Upto 100% scholarship in academics and sports”, was not substantiated with supporting evidence of 100% scholarships availed by any of their students, and was misleading by implication and ambiguity regarding the amount of scholarship and the total number of scholarships being offered. Claim, “100% placement for 2017 batch”, 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 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: "Jetking Infotrain Ltd"
PRODUCT:"Jetking Computer Education"

COMPLAINT:

"1. India's No.1 2. 100% Job guarantee 3. 5 year placement promise"

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 at which time, they informed that the advertisement has been discontinued. Advertiser was provided with an option for Informal Resolution (IR) of the complaint, but however, they did not complete the IR 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 in the absence of claim support data, the CCC concluded that the claim, “India’s No.1” was not substantiated with any verifiable comparative data of the advertiser’s institute and other similar institutes, or through a third party validation, and the claim is misleading by exaggeration. Claim, “100% Job guarantee”, 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, and the claim is misleading by exaggeration. Claim, “5 year placement promise”, was not substantiated and 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:"Jumbo Jet Aviation Academy"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“100% Job Result”

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 Result”, 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 UPHELD."

COMPANY:"Kites Academy"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“State No.1 Hyderabad & Avanigadda faculty”

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, “State No.1 Hyderabad & Avanigadda faculty”, was not substantiated with any verifiable comparative data of the advertiser’s institute and other similar institutes, or through a third party validation. The claim 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:"Kongu Nadu Educational and Charitable Trust-"
PRODUCT:"The Kongu Polytechnic College"

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 UPHELD."

COMPANY:"P M R Educational Trust"
PRODUCT:"P M R Engineering College"

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 UPHELD."

COMPANY:"IIT Gurukul Pawar Sir"
PRODUCT:"Pawar PMT Classes"

COMPLAINT:

“100% selection in JEE / NEET.”

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% selection in JEE / NEET”, was not substantiated with verifiable supporting data and 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 UPHELD."

COMPANY:"Sri Pragathi Institute-"
PRODUCT:"Pragati Bank Academy"

COMPLAINT:

“No.1 banking coaching centre.”

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, “No.1 banking coaching centre”, 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 is 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: "Punjab Educational Charitable Trust"
PRODUCT:"Punjab College of Engineering"

COMPLAINT:

“100% Job 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% 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 UPHELD."

COMPANY:"Royale College Of Tour and Hotel Management"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“100% Job 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 while the advertiser may be providing job assistance to their students, the use of 100% numerical is not relevant for “job 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:"Super Twenty Training Institute"
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 while the advertiser may be providing placement assistance to their students, 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: "SkyWay School"
PRODUCT:"Skyway Career Hub"

COMPLAINT:

“Get guaranteed jobs.”

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, “Get Guaranteed jobs”, was not substantiated with supporting data and is misleading by implication 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 UPHELD."

COMPANY: "Guruji Educational Trust-"
PRODUCT:"Sri Aurobindo Mira College Of Education"

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 UPHELD."

COMPANY:"Sant Baba Bhag Singh University"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“Scholarship available up to 100%.”

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, “Scholarship available upto 100%”, was not substantiated with supporting evidence of 100% scholarships availed by any of their students, and was misleading by implication and ambiguity regarding the amount of scholarship and the total number of scholarships being offered. 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:"Swami Vivekanand Subharti University"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"1. 100% placement assistance. 2. Upto 100% Scholarship for Meritorious Students."

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 claim, “Upto 100% Scholarship for Meritorious Students”, was not substantiated with supporting evidence of 100% scholarships availed by any of their students, and was misleading by implication and ambiguity regarding the amount of scholarship and the total number of scholarships being offered. The CCC noted that while the advertiser may be providing placement assistance to their students, 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 Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.""

COMPANY:"Techno Vision Super -30"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"1. Get Scholarship 100%. 2. India's best educational Institute."

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 claim, “Get Scholarship 100%”, was not substantiated with supporting evidence of 100% scholarships availed by any of their students, and was misleading by exaggeration and ambiguity regarding the amount of scholarship and the total number of scholarships being offered. Claim, “India's best educational Institute”, was not substantiated with verifiable comparative data of the advertiser and other similar institutes in the same category, or with market survey data, or through a third party validation; The claim 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:"Unnati Group Of College"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“100% placement in top 10 MNC last 8 yrs.”

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 their institute is running MBA course since 8 years and is providing Zero fee admission with facilities such are Free Transportation, Free Library, Free Uniform, and Free Tuition Fees. Their previous batches of students have already been placed in reputed organizations/companies. No single student has been left without job. Upon carefully viewing the print advertisement, examining the complaint and the response given by the advertiser, the CCC observed that the advertiser’s response has only assertions about their institute. The CCC concluded that the claim, “100% placement in top 10 MNC last 8yrs”, was not substantiated with authentic supporting data such as year wise 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. 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 UPHELD.""

COMPANY:"UPES College of Engineering Studies (UPES)"
PRODUCT:"UPES College of Management & Economics Studies"

COMPLAINT:

"1. 100% BBA placements since 2012 2. First Indian university to be awarded QS Five Stars Global Rating for Employability"

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 claim, “100% BBA placements since 2012”, 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. The claim, “First Indian university to be awarded QS Five Stars Global Rating for Employability”, was not substantiated with verifiable supporting data. Also, the claims are 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 UPHELD.""

COMPANY:"Western Institute of Technology"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"1. No.1 in Global Recognition 2. 100% placement support"

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 Western institute of Technology is a collaborative training provider of continuing education programs of the University of Wisconsin Platteville, USA and approved education provider of Franklin University, Ohio-USA, authorized to provide Certificate and Diploma Courses. Western Institute of Technology in Academic Collaboration with KSOU was offering Masters, Degree & Diploma Programme. It is also recognized by IGNOU as Western Community College. As such they are claiming to be No. 1 in Global Recognition. Further the words 100% placement, means to give a total support to the students for their placement. It is only the full support that the institute offer to their students for placement through their placement cell and also by organizing job fairs and collaborating with many industries and companies. As claim support data, the advertiser provided a copy of fashion design affiliation, certificate of continuing education given by Franklin University, Memorandum of understanding between Karnataka State Open University, Mysore and Western institute of Technology, provisional certificate given to the institute by Skill Council for Mining Sector, certificate for registration for vocational training provider, certificate of university of Wisconsin-Platteville given to the institute for being collaborative provider of professional development education and training programs, and recognition letter by Indira Gandhi National Open University (IGNOU). Upon carefully viewing the print advertisement, examining the complaint and the response given by the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim support data for “No.1 in Global Recognition”, was only pertaining to the advertised institute and did not have any verifiable comparative data of the advertiser’s institute and other similar institutes, or a third party validation. The claim was not substantiated and is misleading by exaggeration. The noted that while the advertiser may be providing placement support to their students, the use of 100% numerical is not relevant for “placement support” 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 Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.""

COMPANY:"Winner Institute Of Competitive Exam"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“No.1 institute for banking.”

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, “No.1 institute for banking.”, 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 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:"Elation Hair and Skin Clinic"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"1. Bring Back your Hair 2. FDA approved medicines and protocol only"

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. Advertiser did not provide details of Hair treatment. 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, “Bring Back your Hair”, was not substantiated with clinical evidence and is misleading by implication and exaggeration. Claim, “FDA approved medicines and protocol only”, was not substantiated with supporting evidence, and is misleading by ambiguity and implication. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

COMPANY:"Chennai Hospitals Information Center"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“No.1 Ranking Holder Among All Fertility Centers of Chennai”

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, “No.1 Ranking Holder Among All Fertility Centers of Chennai”, was not substantiated with verifiable comparative data / market survey data of the advertiser and other similar institutes, and the claim is misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

COMPANY:"Perfect Point"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"1. Sculpting you to a perfect figure by perfect point 2. Coolsculpting -Permanent"

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, “Sculpting you to a perfect figure by perfect point”, and “Coolsculpting –Permanent”, were not substantiated with supporting clinical evidence, and are misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

COMPANY:"Zee Laboratories Limited"
PRODUCT:"Myfair Fairness Forever Cream"

COMPLAINT:

"1. India’s Most Promising Brands 2016 2. Asia’s Greatest Brands and Leaders 3. Over 1,00,00,000 Sold 4. Medically Proven 5. Pack Visual Showing the transformation of the models face from dark to fair is misleading Claim no.4 and 5 was challenged under complaint reference no.1609-C.1173 which was Upheld by the CCC. Please refer to our email dated 9th November 2016 conveying the recommendation of CCC. In view of non- compliance this claim was being intimated to the regulatory authority."

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 advertiser did not provide a copy of the particular awards/certificates as claimed in the advertisement. The CCC concluded that the claims, “India’s Most Promising Brands 2016” and “Asia’s Greatest Brands and Leaders”, were not substantiated with details of the awards as well as references of the award such as the year, source and category for the awards received. The advertisement is misleading by exaggeration and omission of a disclaimer to qualify these claims. Claim, “Over 1,00,00,000 Sold”, was not substantiated with supporting evidence or by a third party validation, and is misleading by exaggeration. Claim, “Medically Proven”, was not substantiated with clinical evidence and is misleading. Pack visual showing the transformation of the model’s face from dark to fair is misleading by gross exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.""

COMPANY: "Slim-N-Health"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"1. Reduce the increased weight. 2. Now there is no need for exercise, medicine and also ,no need for operation. Your increased weight will be reduced and not only this but you can also give proper shape to your body. 3. The before and after visuals in the Ad appear to be misleading."

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. Advertiser did not provide details of the treatment procedure for weight reduction. 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, “Reduce the increased weight”, “Now there is no need for exercise, medicine and also ,no need for operation”, “Your increased weight will be reduced and not only this but you can also give proper shape to your body”, were not substantiated with supporting clinical evidence, and with treatment efficacy data, and are 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:"Dr Dev Slimming Clinic"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“Reduce 4 kg stomach at Rs.1500 within 15 days or money 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, “Reduce 4 kg stomach at Rs.1500 within 15 days or money back”, was not substantiated with supporting clinical evidence for the assured weight reduction from stomach, and / or with evidence of the customers who were refunded the fee as per money back gurantee. The claim is misleading by ambiguity and 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: "Gloss Whey Protein"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"1. Boosts the immune system 2. Promotes fat loss 3. Improves heart health 4. Promotes healthy insulin secretion 5. Promotes rapid healing of wounds 6. improves cognitive performance 7. build stronger bones and muscles"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the concerned Media (Hindustan Media Ventures Ltd) 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 prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the print advertisement. In the absence of response from the concerned media and comments from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims, “Boosts the immune system”, “Promotes fat loss”, “Improves heart health”, “Promotes healthy insulin secretion”, “Promotes rapid healing of wounds”, “improves cognitive performance”, and “build stronger bones and muscles”, were not substantiated with clinical 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: "Gloss Mass Gainer"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"1. Increase fat mobilization & decreased body fat 2. Accelerate muscle tissue repair ."

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the concerned Media (Hindustan Media Ventures Ltd) 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 prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the print advertisement. In the absence of response from the concerned media and comments from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims, “Increase fat mobilization & decreased body fat”, and “Accelerate muscle tissue repair”, were not substantiated with clinical 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:"Gloss Creatine"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"1. Increase Workout Capacity 2. Build More Muscle Mass 3. Improve Your Strength"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the concerned Media (Hindustan Media Ventures Ltd) 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 prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the print advertisement. In the absence of response from the concerned media and comments from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims, “Increase Workout Capacity”, “Build More Muscle Mass”, and “Improve Your Strength”, were not substantiated with clinical evidence of product efficacy, and are misleadingby exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

COMPANY:"Shretej Slimming Centre"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"1. Reduce 4-6 kg weight Loss within 15 days. 2. No Medicine 3. No Crash Diet 4. No Side Effect 5.100 Result and Guarantee The visual in the ad appears to be misleading"

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. Advertiser did not provide details of the treatment procedure for weight reduction. 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, “Reduce 4-6 kg weight Loss within 15 days”, “No Medicine”, “No Crash Diet”, “No Side Effect”, “100 Result and Guarantee”, were not substantiated with supporting clinical evidence, and with treatment efficacy data, and are misleading by exaggeration. The visual in the advertisement implies a significant weight loss which is also grossly misleading. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

COMPANY:"Angels Advanced Clinic"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"1. Get Rid of all your hair problems through stem cell therapy and get thicker hair. 2. Get permanent hair free skin The before and after visuals in the ad appear to be misleading."

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, “Get Rid of all your hair problems through stem cell therapy and get thicker hair”, and “Get permanent hair free skin”, were not substantiated with supporting clinical evidence, and are 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: "Mondelez India Foods P. Ltd."
PRODUCT:"Cadbury Lickables"

COMPLAINT:

"Cadburys Lickables Advertisement shows the Lickables pure yummy melted chocolate and and chocolate chips. when I opened it , it's was full of sugar balls n cocoa balls chocolate was under that. In advertisement they show less amount of balls that can be count in a seconds. There are chocolate chips of chocolate n white chocolate. Picture attached Will show you the lots of sugar balls. It caused infection in my kid stomach. The picture I had send you is totally different from the video.....when the pack is opened. As there is more of sugar balls the quantity of chocolate is less .They charge us for chocolate and providing sugar balls. When we purchased product of such companies we are sure that we are having quality food n safe for one's health but it also led to my daughter stomach infection with high fever. I want to reopen my complaint as I found the advertisement of Cadburys Lickables truly misleads as they shows their product is filled with chocolate but it is filled with sugar balls . How can such a reputated company be so careless ? ....that they do not know what they are selling. They promise the taste of chocolate but they are providing sugar balls .....after having that my daughter have not consumed Cadburys chocolate , though before that she only loves to eat Cadburys chocolate nothing else in the chocolate. Therefore I would request to reconsider my complaint."

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 as well as a product sample. The advertiser had stated in their response that the white and brown balls which the consumer mistakenly assumed to be "sugar balls" and "cocoa bails" respectively, are actually wheat crispies. This component in the Product is important for textural gradation. The crispies are crunchy in contrast to smoothness of the chocolaty creme which enhances the elements of the "eat experience". The picture provided by the complainant does not accurately represent the number of crispies that should be in the Product as per their product design, which is about 5% by weight wheat crispies, 10% by weight crushed oreo, and 85% by weight of the Lickables chocolaty crème. The CCC viewed the TVC, verified the contents of the product by opening the sealed product sample, and considered the advertiser’s response and the evidence provided by the complainant. The CCC concluded that the contents of the product as depicted in the TVC was not misleading. The complaint was NOT UPHELD."

COMPANY:"Dr. Basu’s Eye Hospital’s"
PRODUCT:"Isotine Eye Drops"

COMPLAINT:

"New search in field of Ayurvedic-without operation sure shot treatment of (immature) Cataract with Isotine Eye Drop Without operation sure shot treatment of (immature) Cataract, Glaucoma, diabetic retinopathy, macular degeneration, Retinitis Pigmentation. Colour blindness and other diseases with Isotine Eye Drops"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

""As per my previous complaint (with tracking ID 615392849f66), the isotine eye drops advertisement With the claim of curing cataract without surgery has again been published with the same claims again, today, in the Dainik Bhaskar, Jodhpur edition on page number 5. As per your assurance, I haven't expected this. I hoped, the peoples listen to the agency, But I think it’s not the case. But if this isn't, then I hope you will take necessary Actions to stop this false and non-sense propaganda and stop such peoples from playing with other peoples eyes and lives. As these sort of advertisements bring bad name to the whole of medical faculty. pls fnd attachment of advertisement (page 5 dainik bhaskar jodhpur Rajasthan, dated 24th august 2017""

Recommendation: UPHELD

""Cataract – Item no. 7 – DMR Act Item no. 9 – Schedule J Glaucoma Item no. 24 – DMR Act Item no. 22– Schedule J Diseases and Disorder of Optical System Item No. 11- DMR Act""

COMPANY: "Vancor Impex Pvt. Ltd."
PRODUCT:"Vacurect"

COMPLAINT:

"Vacurect giving men more power. Let the romance grow even if you grow older. Bring the lost romance back to your life. Recharge your passion and satisfy her every desire. With vacurect meet a new, romantic you that you never knew. Helpful for senior citizens, men with diabetes, prostrate problems etc Easy to use and no side effects. No prescription required. 100% safe and clinically tested."

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"Claims 1 to 7 need to be substantiated with data from independent scientific studies Claims 5 to 7 can cause harm to consumers who use the product without consulting doctors? Important caution of consulting a doctor before taking this medicine is missing. This is an omission. 100% safe and clinically tested. Details of tests need to be given. According to us, the advertisement contravenes Chapter 1.1, 1.4 and 1.5 of ASCI code and the provisions of Drugs and Magic Remedies Act Action to be taken: We propose that the advertisement should be immediately withdrawn Action we propose - this advt should be immediately withdrawn"

Recommendation: UPHELD

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

COMPANY:"Johnson & Johnson Ltd"
PRODUCT:"Johnson's Baby Laundry Detergent"

COMPLAINT:

"“Best Cleaning and Protection for your baby’s clothes”, “Family Detergents Leaves Brighteners-Harsh on baby skin” Video shows the Mildness test against leading laundry detergent Complaint:"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"“Print Advertisement Market Superiority Claim i) The advertisement contains the statement “Best Cleaning and Protection for your baby’s clothes” (Disclaimer: “Best” refers to Johnson’s Best for baby standards), which is misleading. The claim means that the Product is superior to all competing products, both detergent liquids and powder, in the market and the Advertiser is put to strict proof. Robust substantiation for superiority claim is required by the Advertiser, establishing that their Product is superior in cleaning and protection (germ removal) against all available competition products in the market, without which the same would be highly misleading and unfair to the competition, particularly the Complainant and Products which are leading household detergent brands. Further, it is also pertinent to note that the disclaimer for the claim “Best refers to Johnson’s Best for babies standards” is in itself contrary and misleading. The disclaimer in itself evinces that the claim is without any substantiation of comparative data against the competition. Disparaging Remarks ii) In addition to the above, the Advertiser has depicted the comparative Mildness Test under UV Light stating “Family Detergents Leaves Brighteners-Harsh on baby skin. The statement implies that the all family detergents, including all products of the Complainants are harsh on baby skin. The statement denigrates the entire laundry detergent category, including of the Complainant’s laundry detergent products, which are leading products with substantial market share. It is trite law that an advertisement may promote its product and superiority but cannot denigrate/disparage the competitor. Further, it is equally settled law that advertisements need not denigrate the competitor/rival products directly and even generic disparagement i.e. indirect disparagement without identifying the product but the product category, is also equally objectionable and not permissible, as it would imply all competitors under such category would be disparaged. This principle has been upheld umpteen times in Reckitt Colman v. M.P. Ramachandran (1999), Dabur India Limited v. Emami Limited (2004), Dabur v. Colgate Palmolive (2004) to name a few and most recently in Hindustan Unilever Limited v. Gujarat Cooperative (2017). The print ad claims that all family detergents, which includes products of the Complainant, contain harmful optical brighteners which are harsh on baby skin. The statement of residual optical brighteners of all detergents being harsh is a highly disparaging statement against the complainant’s products which are also incorrect and misleading. b) Digital Video “Voice of Science - Johnson’s Baby Laundry Detergent” available on Advertiser’s YouTube channel i. In the video commercial, the Advertiser goes further beyond to directly disparage leading detergent manufacturers. We are the leading detergent manufacturers with leading detergents brands such as Surf Excel, Rin, Wheel, etc. Advertiser has depicted the Mildness test against leading laundry detergent and indirectly refers to the Complainant’s brands. The commercial shows residual optical brighteners in the cloth dipped in competitor leading detergent under a UV lamp. It further states the leading detergent brand contains excess residual harmful brighteners and can lead to harmful conditions like skin dermatitis. The complainant is one of the leading detergent manufacturer with various detergent products in premium and mass segments. Such statement is highly disparaging and misleading as the leading brands as that of the Complainant use high quality ingredients and are assessed under strict safety standards. Optical brighteners are commonly used across the world not only in laundry detergents but also by textile manufacturers. It is also pertinent to note that optical brighteners are also used in food products. The use of optical brighteners is not prohibited and has not been identified as a safety concern as depicted by the Advertiser, either in India or elsewhere. We have herein attached article from the New York Times as Annexure B, which clearly state that there are no human health concerns on optical brighteners/ Fluorescent Whitening Agents (FWAs) and any such reports are inconclusive. We put the Advertiser to strict proof to establish use of low quality harmful optical brighteners by leading family detergent manufacturers, including that of the Complainant and the use of the same leading to such harmful conditions as skin dermatitis. Further it is also necessary for the Advertiser to establish that the optical brighteners are used in such excess quantity in leading detergent powders and leads to skin dermatitis by normal consumers. High Quality Optical brighteners in regulated quantity has been proven to be safe for use with no human safety concerns.”"

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 granted an extension of two days to the standard lead time of seven days to submit their reply in response to their request for extension. The advertiser representatives were also given personal hearing by ASCI. Advertiser in their response stated that “Best for Baby TM"" is a trademarked term used by the advertiser for their entire range of baby products, and signifies compliance with Johnson's ""five-level safety assurance process"". Advertiser has carried out detailed internal scientific studies that establish that the Product has high cleaning efficiency, is effective in removing 99% of germs on baby clothes and is mild and gentle on baby's skin without causing any irritation or adverse effect. Scientific studies have indicated that the presence of Optical Brighteners may be harmful for human skin, particularly sensitive skin. The advertiser’s Product does not contain any optical brighteners and is not harmful to baby skin. This depiction shown in the digital video is a factual assertion on the basis of scientific evidence. As claim support data, the advertiser provided a copy of an infographic representing the five-level safely assurance process, various articles/journal references on Transfer of Optical Brighteners from Fabric to Human Skin, Contact allergy to an optical whitener in washing powders, contact dermatitis to detergents:, etc. The claim support data was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and the digital video and considered the Advertiser’s response as well as the opinion of Technical expert presented at the meeting. The CCC observed that while the advertiser asserts about “Best for Baby” terminology, the claim in the advertisement refers to “Best cleaning and protection …” which creates a predominant impression that it is the ""best"" among all such products available in the market. The CCC concluded that the claim, “Best Cleaning” was inadequately substantiated with comparative data against the competition either in detergent for babycare or in the general detergents category, and is misleading by implication that the Product is superior to all competing products. The print advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. This complaint was UPHELD. The CCC, based on the literature provided by the advertiser, agreed that the optical brighteners do pose a potential health risk however mild and in this context, the depiction of Mildness test against leading laundry detergent shown in the digital video, was not considered to be objectionable. This complaint was NOT UPHELD. The CCC was of the view that the claim made in print advertisement, “Family Detergents Leaves Brighteners-Harsh on baby skin”, and the digital video showing Mildness test against leading laundry detergent does not amount to direct disparagement of the complainant’s product. This complaint was NOT UPHELD.""

COMPANY:"Brainbees Solutions Private Limited"
PRODUCT:"Firstcry.com"

COMPLAINT:

"Advertisement showing small children falling of staircase, tricycle, falling from nowhere, into the crib depicting fall in prices on the ecommerce website The rhyme humpty dumpty sung in the background. The brand is showing children aged 1 to 7 falling of staircases, into their crib, bouncing, falling from firstcry boxes. I m complaining that this falling of small children is objectionable and would make small children do things the should not do. Please discontinue this advertisement. Advertisement depicting children falling vis-s-vis prices of items on firstcry falling i.e. sale Child Abuse. children of various ages falling of firstcry boxes, infants falling on the floor, boy slipping off the sofa just about to hit the matted floor, etc"

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, and on receiving a reminder from ASCI, the advertiser submitted their written response. The advertiser had stated in their response that all falls by children shown in the TVC represent day to day situations when they play. Also, each fall is a soft fall representative of how parents protect their children in the play area. The advertiser had duly obtained consent of the parents of the children who appeared in the TVC before the shoot and the parents were even present during the whole shoot. The CCC viewed the TVC and the YouTube advertisement and considered the advertiser’s response. The CCC observed that the particular scenes in the TVC depicting `a small girl falling off from the stack of boxes’, `a boy slipping off the sofa’, and `a girl sliding down backwards through the edge of the staircase’, show / encourage dangerous acts which are likely to encourage minors to emulate such acts in a manner which could harm or injury. The visuals manifest a disregard for safety and encourages negligence. The CCC concluded that the TVC contravened Chapters III.2(b) and III.3 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.""

COMPANY:"Merck Limited"
PRODUCT:"Polybion"

COMPLAINT:

"1. Enhance your life by rejuvenating yourself 2. It is time to say goodbye to tiredness and fatigue 3. High on energy, high on life"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"Online advt at URL: http://www.polybion.in/index.php The advertisement claims that their product 1. Enhance your life by rejuvenating yourself 2. It is time to say goodbye to tiredness and fatigue 3. High on energy, high on life The advertising implies that taking Polybion (a mix of B vitamins) can help anyone rejuvenate, overcome tiredness /fatigue, increase energy. These claims are patently false (and too broad and vague to be applicable) unless someone is suffering from a fairly severe B vitamin deficiency that is medically diagnosed and specifically treated. Consumption of B vitamins when there is no need has no benefit."

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 B-vitamins supplementation reduces fatigue and tiredness in situations of inadequate micronutrient status. The target population is assumed to be the general population. Haematological effects of vitamin B12 deficiency include amongst others a gradual onset of the common symptoms of anaemia, such as diminished energy and exercise tolerance, fatigue, shortness of breath and palpitations. Therefore, reduction of tiredness and fatigue is a beneficial physiological effect. Claims of `Enhance your life by rejuvenating yourself’ and `High on energy, high on life’ are related to the support of B-vitamins in energy release and restoration of energy which is often diminished due to deficiency of vitamin B, there is well-known physiological role of B-vitamins that these act as cofactors/ co-enzymes in energy-yielding metabolism. The maintenance of normal metabolic function through B vitamin supplementation to ensure adequate availability of energy is analogous to being rejuvenated in individuals in a deficiency state. The website also gives explanation on vitamin A, D, E and K and symptoms of their deficiency. As a recommendation, they have requested the consumer to consult an Expert before taking their product Polybion. As claim support data, the advertiser provided symptoms of B vitamin deficiency and advantages of taking a B VITAMIN complex, copy of FDA License, and literature on the prevalence of vitamin B12 deficiency. The claim support data was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC viewed the website advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response as well as the opinion of Technical expert presented at the meeting. The CCC observed that Vitamin supplement would be most beneficial to an individual in case of a deficiency and the advertisement does not state this upfront. The disclaimer in the advertisement was difficult to locate and was not prominent. The CCC considered the information provided therein to be vague and generic and hence not acceptable as an appropriate disclaimer. The CCC concluded that the claims, “It is time to say goodbye to tiredness and fatigue”, “Enhance your life by rejuvenating yourself”, and “High on energy, high on life”, are misleading by ambiguity and omission as it does not talk of deficiency state. The website advertisement contravened Chapter I.4 of the ASCI Code and Clause 2 of ASCI Guidelines for Disclaimers (“A disclaimer should not attempt to hide material information with respect to the claim, the omission / absence of which is likely to make the advertisement deceptive or conceal its commercial intent”). This complaint was UPHELD.""

COMPANY:"Sangeetha Mobiles Pvt Ltd."
PRODUCT:"Sangeetha Mobiles"

COMPLAINT:

"0% GST. The mobiles you buy in Sangeetha don't have GST. Yes. Heard it right our mobiles don't have GST. Sangeetha Mobiles. I think that the Mobile Retailer is misleading people with 0% GST remark. It don't take a much common sense to confirm that they might have included the GST amount to be paid to the government in basic price itself. Or they can't find a way to sell mobiles with 0% GST. I think it is nearly impossible. They are misleading people with such lame remarks. Most will see this as attractive scheme and will fell to the scam. I hope the authorities take required action on this matter."

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 had stated in their response that in a GST Bonus Offer (GST Free Offer) the modus operandi is that a customer gets a cash back of 5% (when paid using his/her Visa Card); Advertiser offers an instant cash back of 7% of the purchase value. Thereby making it a GST free offer (GST on mobile phones 12%). The Terms & Conditions with respect to this offer are clearly stated in the website. Advertiser’s response provided a link for the terms and conditions of the offer. The CCC viewed the website advertisement and considered the advertiser’s response, and also verified the terms and conditions mentioned on the website. The CCC observed that it is a common practice that traders may absorb the GST amount to pass on the benefit to consumer. Based on this information, the CCC concluded that the claim offer “0% GST @ Sangeetha. GST on iphone se 12%. GST Free Sale”, was a puffery and also not misleading as it was qualified to mention that it is subject to terms and conditions of the offer. The complaint was NOT UPHELD.""

COMPANY: "Arulmigu Kalasalingam College of Pharmacy"
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 in the absence of any comments or response from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that while the advertiser may be offering placement assistance to students, 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:"Ayyappa Institute of Management Studies"
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 in the absence of any comments or response from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that while the advertiser may be offering placement assistance to students, 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: "Chronicle Institute of Competitive Study"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“Success Assure or Fees Return*”

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 in the absence of any comments or response from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “Success Assure or Fees Return*”, was not substantiated with supporting data of their successful students and / or any supporting evidence of the students who were refunded with the fees back. The claim 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 UPHELD."

COMPANY: "Food Craft Institute"
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 in the absence of any comments or response from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that while the advertiser may be offering placement assistance to students, 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:"Global College of Engineering And Technology"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“100% placements.”

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 in the absence of any comments or response from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “100% Placements”, 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 UPHELD."

COMPANY:"Sir C.V. Raman Junior College"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"“No.1”"

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 advertisements and in the absence of any comments or response from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the institute claiming to be “No.1”, 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 advertisements 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: "CLC Career Line Coaching"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“No.1 institute in Jodhpur”

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 in the absence of any comments or response from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “No.1 institute in Jodhpur”, 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 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: "CLC Career Line Coaching"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“No.1 institute in Alwar”

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 in the absence of any comments or response from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “No.1 institute in Jodhpur”, 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 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: "Kalvi Higher Education and Research Institute"
PRODUCT:

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 post the due date. Advertiser in their response stated that they have been conducting certificate courses in tie-up with top notch Software Company for more than two years and they are training their students with well experienced faculty. In view of their efforts and assistance, students from their organisation have been placed in leading software companies. Similarly, their well experienced and committed faculty are giving role based training to their students which made their students to get remarkable success in those courses. They have assisted their students to get placement in leading IT companies. In addition, they guide their students to apply for jobs with the companies having vacancy and it is an assistance to the students to place them in companies. Hence they have claimed this 100% placement assistance to their students. Upon carefully viewing the print advertisement, examining the complaint and the response from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that while the advertiser may be providing placement assistance to their students, 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: "Maharishi Vidya Mandir"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“Group of India's Best Awarded CBSE School.”

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 a copy of the award certificate given by “Education World – Indian School Rankings 2016” to the advertiser’s institute. As this response was inadequate, ASCI requested the advertiser to provide supporting data along with survey methodology to substantiate the objected claim. ASCI also informed the advertiser that the details of the award certificate did not match with the claim made in the advertisement (“Certificate of Standing – Day School”) . In response to this query, the advertiser sought for ASCI clarifications as to how the authenticity of Education World and the award given by them is questionable. Also, the advertiser further stated that since this award is for Academic year 2016, they will not be in a position to mention the same in current year advertising. Upon carefully viewing the print advertisement, examining the complaint and the response with the supporting data given by the advertiser, the CCC observed that what the school has received is a Certificate of Standing - `Day Schools’ “Academic Reputation – 1”. This certificate did not correlate with the claim made by the advertiser’s institute being “India's Best Awarded CBSE School”. The CCC concluded that the claim, “Group of India's Best Awarded CBSE School”, was false and the claim was misleading by misrepresentation of the certificate received. The claim is not qualified to mention the source and date of research and is misleading by omission. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1, I.2 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.""

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

COMPLAINT:

“The No.1 hotel management institute in India.”

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 through their Advocates. Advocate on behalf of the advertiser stated in their response that ASCI is a company with no legal or statutory backing for receiving and reviewing complaints against third parties. The present complaint initiated by ASCI is invalid and not legally tenable as ASCI is not empowered in any manner to do so. ASCI does not have any authority to review and/or decide on the content of advertisements of third parties. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advocate’s response. Regarding the Advocate’s comment on ASCI’s jurisdiction, the CCC referred to the 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 self regulatory bodies 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 also advised that the advertiser should take cognizance of the MoU the Department of Consumer Affairs has entered into with ASCI to deal with misleading advertisements. In the absence of specific comments from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “The No.1 hotel management institute in India”, 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 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: "Aptech Limited"
PRODUCT:"Arena Animation Academy"

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. The advertiser had stated in their response that the said advertisement was not published by them but by their franchisee. Advertiser further stated that they have instructed their franchisee to withdraw the said advertisements and to refrain from releasing any advertisement that violate ASCI code. ASCI requested the advertiser to provide a copy of the warning letter issued to their franchisee. Advertiser did not provide this information in time for the meeting. Upon carefully viewing the print advertisement, examining the complaint and the response given by the advertiser, the CCC concluded that while the advertiser may be offering placement assistance to students, 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: "Nurture Health Care"
PRODUCT:"Medora Upchar Paddhati"

COMPLAINT:

“A powerful solution for reducing weight and stomach girth.”

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 in the absence of any comments or response from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim (in Marathi) as translated in English, “A powerful solution for reducing weight and stomach girth”, was not substantiated with evidence of product efficacy, and the claim is misleading by exaggeration. The visual in the advertisement implies a significant weight loss which is also grossly misleading. The print advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

COMPANY: "Dr. Patels Homeocare"
PRODUCT:"Fertility Clinic"

COMPLAINT:

"1. Having a child through German Technology. 2. No IVF/IUI. 3. Back Pain, Tonsils, Adenoid, Hemorrhoids, Prostate, Stone can be treated without operation."

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

""1. Claims 1 to 3 need to be substantiated by independent research data. 2. Are there independent reports confirming the effectiveness of German Technology for having a child? 3. What is the treatment/method used if there is no IVF/IUI? 4. Are there Independent reports to confirm that the technique/method used for treating Back Pain, Tonsils, Adenoid, Hemorrhoids, Prostate, Stone done without operation is effective? 5. How can it be claimed that treatment for child birth as well as other problems can be given at the same place? Are there specialist doctors for treating each of these very different diseases? The claim needs to be substantiated by independent report. According to us, the advertisement contravenes Chapter 1.1 and 1.4 of ASCI code Action to be taken""

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 (in Gujarati) as translated in English, “Having a child through German Technology”, “No IVF/IUI”, and “Back Pain, Tonsils, Adenoid, Hemorrhoids, Prostate, Stone can be treated without operation”, were not substantiated with supporting clinical evidence. Also, the claims are misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

COMPANY: "Ambuja Cements Ltd"
PRODUCT:"Ambuja Plus Cool Walls"

COMPLAINT:

""1. Now your city will remain 5 degrees cooler during summers. 2. Presenting strong walls made with heat barrier technology. 3. Heat resistance concrete blocks.""

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"1. Claims 1 to 3 need to be substantiated by independent studies and research data. 2. How can it be claimed that entire city will remain 5 degree cooler in summer? Has this been substantiated with an independent report? 3. Has the “Heat Barrier Technology” result been approved by an Independent Agency? 4. Has the “Ambuja Plus Cool Walls” been tested for heat resistance by an Independent Agency? 5. Are there Independent studies conducted on Ambuja Plus Cool Walls to confirm that it brings down temperature by 5 degrees? According to us, the advertisement contravenes Chapter 1.1 and 1.4 of ASCI code Action to be taken."

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, “Now your city will remain 5 degrees cooler during summers”, “Presenting strong walls made with heat barrier technology”, and “Heat resistance concrete blocks”, 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 UPHELD."

COMPANY: "Pratiraj Herbal Pharmacy"
PRODUCT:"Amrit Navjeevan Hair Oil"

COMPLAINT:

"Claims objected to: Freedom from baldness and hair fall. Complaint: The ad has been asked for freedom from baldness and the fall of hair, and it is definitively written to eliminate Russian. All these things are laboratory certified."

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

""Baldness Item no- 5 Schedule J""

COMPANY: "Deaf cure centre (Hearing Treatment)"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

""1. Get rid off all types of deafness without any operation, machine and cochlear implantation successfully at deaf cure centre. 2. Patient can start hearing from the first hour of treatment. 3.One can avoid the cost of lakhs of rupees for cochlear implantation and can build his/her future by taking treatment to improve hearing capacity. 4. Cure your deafness and improve your hearing loss. 5. Deafness caused due to birth, age, medicinal side-effect, hole in eardrum can be cured accurately. 6. This treatment is also effective for deaf and dumb. 7. Deafness due to any accident will also be cured by this treatment. 8. You can see the audio-video of healed patients at centre or on you tube and you can search as Praveen Surana Deaf Cure centre on google/yahoo/social media and contact. Our objections: 1. Claims 1 to 8 need to be substantiated by independent studies and research data. 2. How can deafness be cured without any operation, machine and cochlear implantation? 3. What is the base for claiming that Patient can start hearing from the first hour of treatment? It needs to be substantiated and certified by competent independent authority. 4. How does deafness due to birth, age, side effect of medicine or hole in eardrum be cured without any operation? Is it safe for people of all age groups? Can one go under this treatment without consulting a doctor? 5. What is the base for claiming this treatment to be effective for deaf and dumb too? Is there any independent report which can prove it? 6. Can a patient suffering from deafness due to accident take treatment without consulting ENT doctor? How safe it is? Whether it is certified by any independent agency? 7. What is the proof that videos uploaded on You tube and social media are authentic and not paid actors for promotion? As per clause 1.3 of ASCI Code""

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

""Deafness Item no- 8 DMR Act Item no- 13 Schedule J""

COMPANY: "Vinayaka Hospital"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"This Is Misleading In That Advertise Mentioned :- If Laser Available Then Why Durbin (Endoscopy)? This Is Misleading Because Durbine (Endoscopy) Is Essential Part Of Urology Surgery All Operation Will Are Done With The Endoscopy Only. Laser Is Not A Substitute For Endoscope. Laser Is Used With Endoscope To Break The Stone. This Advertise Mislead In The Way That Laser Is Better Then Durbin"

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 was of the view that laser by itself is not a complete treatment, as surgery is used in treatment for removal of stone. Laser is also not a substitute for Durbine (Endoscopy), as Endoscopy is required for diagnosis. The CCC viewed the Ad – Hoarding 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 Hindi) “Laser hai toh Durbine kyon”, (If Laser is available then why Durbin (Endoscopy)) was false and misleading by ambiguity and implication. The Ad - Hoarding contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

COMPANY: "Nirma Limited "
PRODUCT:"Nirma Advanced washing powder"

COMPLAINT:

"Hiritik Roshan Advertise by geting his white clothes painted through canvas colors. And he himself gets washed and get the same brightness back. And advertise that its the best product. 1) Hirthik aad this as he himself wash clothes everyday. He even didnt know the process. 2) After getting the clothes painted from canvas color, I have washed the clothes with that product, but it did not happen as in the way as spoken by hirthik roshan"

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 through their Advertising Agency. The Advertising Agency had stated in their response that in the TVC, Hritik Roshan does not claim that Nirma Advance is the best product and nor does the product guarantees to remove all / any kind of stains. The CCC viewed the TVC and considered the Advertising Agency’s response. The CCC observed that the TVC makes reference to ‘Ziddi Daag’ and does not talk about removal of water colours or paint. Furthermore, the TVC does not depict “before and after” effect of product efficacy. The CCC concluded that it incorrect of the complainant to conclude from the TVC that Hritik Roshan washes his own clothes. The complaint was NOT UPHELD.""

COMPANY: "BITT RVAIM Educational Pvt. Ltd"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“Scholarship up to 100%.”

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 they intend to provide 100% scholarship to candidates who have qualified Stage-II of National Talent Search Examination (NTSE) / Kishore Vaigyanik Protsahan Yojna (KVPY), and 50% scholarship to candidates who have qualified Stage-I of NTSE / KVPY. As this response was considered inadequate without the relevant claim support data, ASCI requested the advertiser to provide detailed terms and conditions of the scholarship plan, as they intend to provide scholarship. Advertiser did not provide their submission in time for the CCC meeting. The CCC observed that the advertiser has only made assertions about the scholarships being offered to their students. No criteria or basis for the scholarship, and terms and conditions of the scholarship plan was given. Upon carefully viewing the print advertisement, examining the complaint and the response given by the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “Scholarship up to 100%”, was not substantiated with supporting evidence of provisions made by the advertiser to grant the mentioned scholarships. The claim was misleading by ambiguity and omission of the details regarding the amount of scholarship and the total number of scholarships being offered, and the terms and conditions of the scholarship plan. 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 UPHELD.""

COMPANY: "Bharath University"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"“No.1 in India Bharath Institute of higher education & research University”"

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 claim made was based on the ranking given by National Institutional Ranking Framework (NIRF) for Outreach and inclusivity. As claim support data, the advertiser provided a copy of the NIRF Ranking list. Upon carefully viewing the print advertisement, examining the complaint and the response given by the advertiser, the CCC noted that the overall ranking for the Institute as per NIRP web-site was 21 and for “Outreach and Inclusivity, the institute ranked first”. This part of the claim was substantiated . However, the font size used by the advertiser for the “No. 1 in India” part of the claim was disproportionately large than the rest of the claim. The CCC concluded that the claim, “No.1 in India Bharath Institute of higher education & research University”, was misleading by implication with the use of differential font sizes. The advertisement contravened the Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapter I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.""

COMPANY: Dr. Kedar Nath Modi Foundation"
PRODUCT:"Dr. K. N. Modi University"

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 while the advertiser may be providing placement assistance to their students, 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: "Pushkara Computer Institute"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“100% Job Placement.”

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 advertiser’s institute is providing job in private courses and in private sectors and not in any government organization. However, the Advertiser did not provide any supporting data for the claim made. Upon carefully viewing the print advertisement, examining the complaint and the response given by the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “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 UPHELD.""

COMPANY: "Teerthanker Mahaveer University"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“Best Multi-Disciplinary UP state Private University as per NIRF 2017 ranking”

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 in the absence of any comments or response from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “Best Multi-Disciplinary UP state Private University as per NIRF 2017 ranking”, was not substantiated with any verifiable comparative data of the advertiser’s institute and other similar institutes, and with a copy of the NIRF ranking data as claimed in the advertisement. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

COMPANY: "Nilai Educational Trust "
PRODUCT:"Nilai Group of Institutions"

COMPLAINT:

"1.100% scholarship 2.100% placement."

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 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 and exaggeration. 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. The claim is 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: "Dhanalakshmi Srinivasan Charitable and Education Trust"
PRODUCT:"Srinivasan College of Arts and Science"

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. 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 UPHELD."

COMPANY: "Bhabha Group of Institutions"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"“1. 100% placement guarantee otherwise fee return. 2. 100% Job Guaranteed”"

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 claim, “100% placement guarantee otherwise fee return”, was not substantiated with supporting data for 100% placement record of their students and / or any supporting evidence of the students who were refunded with the fees back if they were not provided with placement. Claim, “100% Job Guaranteed”, 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. The claims are 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 UPHELD.""

COMPANY: "Ideal Education Society"
PRODUCT:"ANG Ideal Group of Institutions"

COMPLAINT:

“100% placement oriented.”

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 oriented” 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: "Maya Devi Educational Foundation (Maya Group of Colleges)"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"1. Awarded best hotel management college of Uttarakhand. 2. 100% placement assistance.”"

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 they were given the award for being the best hotel management college of Uttarakhand. Advertiser further stated that they have a full fledged Training and Placement Cell and a team with Training/Assistant Training and Placement Officer to provide assistance to students for getting placed. Upon carefully viewing the advertisement, examining the complaint and the response given by the advertiser, the CCC observed that the advertiser’s response has only assertions about their institute and no evidence has been provided by the advertiser to back their claim. The CCC concluded that the claim, “Awarded best hotel management college of Uttarakhand”, was not substantiated with verifiable supporting data, and is misleading by exaggeration. The claim is not qualified to mention the source and date of research and is misleading by omission. As for the claim, “100% Placement Assistance”, the CCC concluded that while the advertiser may be providing placement assistance to their students, 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 Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.""

COMPANY: "The Pinnacle Educational Center"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“100% Guarantee.”

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% Guarantee” for success at entrance exams for banking examination, was not substantiated with verifiable supporting data 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 UPHELD."

COMPANY: "The Polykids"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“Ranked No.1 pre-school in innovative teaching across Uttarakhand”

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 their institute is one of the leading Pre-School chain in Uttarakhand with total 9 Branches and 3 more branches opening in coming few months in Dehradun. The advertiser’s institute has been Ranked. No.1 by Education Today under various parameters. As claim support data, the advertiser provided a copy of the certificate of achievement given to them by Education Today for being Ranked No.1 Innovative Teaching in Uttarakand, and a copy of the Education Today magazine of September 2016 issue for a special report on Uttarakhand School Ranking. Upon carefully viewing the print advertisement, examining the complaint and the response with the supporting data given by the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “Ranked No.1 pre-school in innovative teaching across Uttarakhand”, was substantiated. The complaint was NOT UPHELD.""

COMPANY: "NIMS University"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"1. Best Private University of the year 2017. 2. 100% Placement.” CCC RECOMMENDATION: Exparte"

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. Advertiser did not provide a copy of this particular award/certificate as claimed in the advertisement. The CCC noted that the Advertiser did not provide the details of the process as to how the selection was done i.e. survey methodology, details of survey data, criteria used for evaluation, questionnaires used, names of other similar colleges that were part of the survey and the outcome of the survey. The CCC concluded that the claim, Best Private University of the year 2017”, was not substantiated with supporting data and is misleading by exaggeration. 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 UPHELD.""

COMPANY: "Purvanchal Educational Trust"
PRODUCT:"Banaras Institute of Polytechnic & Engineering BIPE"

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 UPHELD."

COMPANY: "Pt. T. M. Social Work and Educational Trust"
PRODUCT:"M S D Group of Institution"

COMPLAINT:

"1. 100% Job Placement. 2. Campus Selection- 100% Placement Guarantee”"

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, “100% Job Placement”, and “Campus Selection- 100% Placement Guarantee”, were 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 claims are 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 UPHELD."

COMPANY: "Speakwell Skills Academy Pvt Ltd (Speakwell English Academy)"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“Mumbai's No.1.”

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, “Mumbai’s No.1”, was not substantiated with any verifiable comparative data of the advertiser’s institute and other similar institutes, or through a third party validation. The claim 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: "Neelkanth Group of Institutions"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"1. No.1 Polytechnic Institute in NCR & Western UP. 2. No.1 Polytechnic Institute in the region 3. Asia's Best and Fastest Growing Institution by KPMG.”"

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. Advertiser did not provide a copy of the particular award/certificate as claimed in the advertisement. The CCC noted that the Advertiser did not provide the details of the process as to how the selection was done i.e. survey methodology, details of survey data, criteria used for evaluation, questionnaires used, names of other similar colleges that were part of the survey and the outcome of the survey. The CCC concluded that the claim, “Asia's Best and Fastest Growing institution by KPMG”, was not substantiated with supporting data, and is misleading by exaggeration. The claims, “No.1 Polytechnic Institute in NCR & Western UP”, and “No.1 Polytechnic Institute in the region”, were not substantiated with any verifiable comparative data of the advertiser’s institute and other similar institutes, or any third party validation to prove these claims. The claims are 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: "Hi Will Education"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“100% Job Guarantee.”

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 Guarantee”, 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, and the claim is 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: "Ojas Charitable Trust"
PRODUCT:"Lasante Trauma Emergency Management & Research Institute"

COMPLAINT:

“100% Job Support.”

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 word used in the phrase is Support rather than Guarantee. The support herein means to assist the students in their job search and doesn’t constitute any commitment on the part of the institute. The Support herein merely includes a dedicated Career Advisory Center which offers specialist advice and information to the students and the expert help from Admission Tutors, Course Managers and others. Upon carefully viewing the print advertisement, examining the complaint and the response given by the advertiser, the CCC concluded that that while the advertiser may be providing job support to their students, the use of 100% numerical is not relevant for the claim, “Job Support”. The use of “100%” as a descriptor, with disproportionately large font size in the claim is misleading by implication. The advertisement contravened the Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapter I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.""

COMPANY: "Indian Institute of Computer & Hospital Management"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“Sure job in 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, “Sure job in abroad”, was not substantiated with verifiable supporting data and is misleading by gross 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 UPHELD."

COMPANY: "Bhadauria Group of Institutions"
PRODUCT:"Jaswant Sinh Bhadauria Institute of Technology & Baba Saheb Ambedkar Polytechnic"

COMPLAINT:

“100% Placement Assured.”

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 Assured”, was not substantiated with verifiable supporting data and 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 UPHELD."

COMPANY: "Sir M Visvesvaraya Education Trust"
PRODUCT:"Rajiv Gandhi Group of Institutions"

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 while the advertiser may be providing placement assistance to their students, 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: "Sharda University"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"1. India's #2 ranked Pvt. University with medical college by NIRF ranking 2017 2. Best dental school in North by education leadership awards 2017."

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 in the absence of any comments or response from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “India's #2 ranked Pvt. University with medical college by NIRF ranking 2017”, was not substantiated with NIRF ranking data as claimed in the advertisement. For the claim of Best Dental School, the Advertiser did not provide copy of the particular award/certificate as claimed in the advertisement, the details of the process as to how the selection was done i.e. survey methodology, details of survey data, criteria used for evaluation, questionnaires used, names of other similar colleges that were part of the survey and the outcome of the survey. The credibility and authenticity and name of the certifying body was not provided by the advertiser. The CCC concluded that the claim, “Best dental school in North by education leadership awards 2017”, was not substantiated with supporting data. The claims are 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 UPHELD.""

COMPANY: "Swami Vivekanand University"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"1. No.1 University in Bundelkhand. 2. No.1 University in Fire Safety Course in India. 3. The most awarded university of MP."

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, “No.1 University in Bundelkhand”, and “No.1 University in Fire Safety Course in India”, were not substantiated with any verifiable comparative data of the advertiser’s institute and other similar institutes, or through a third party validation. The claim, “The most awarded university of MP”, was not substantiated with verifiable supporting data. The claims are misleading by gross 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: "Shankar IAS Academy"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“The best IAS academy in South India since 2004.”

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 they have been running the institution from 2004. Advertiser did not provide any supporting data for the claim made. Upon carefully viewing the print advertisement, examining the complaint and the response given by the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “The best IAS academy in South India since 2004”, was not substantiated with verifiable comparative data of the advertiser and other similar institutes, or with market survey data, or through a third party validation from yesr 2004 till 2017. The claim was misleading by gross 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: "Nilayas I-CAT Institute of Commerce"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"1.100% Job Guarantee on Stamp paper. 2. Trusted for 100% Placement since 2008."

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, “100% Job Guarantee on Stamp paper”, and “Trusted for 100% Placement since 2008”, were 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. The claims are misleading by gross 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 UPHELD."

COMPANY: "Apollo Hospitals Enterprise Ltd"
PRODUCT:"Apollo Speciality Hospitals"

COMPLAINT:

“To get permanent freedom from joint pains.”

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 to get permanent freedom from joint pains, the doctors concerned perform Total Knee Replacement and Total Hip Replacement surgeries for appropriate cases thus ensuring permanent relief for the patients from temporary measures such as pain-killers & physiotherapy. As this response was inadequate without the relevant claim support data such as clinical evidence among a statistically significant sample of size patients to prove complete freedom from pain, ASCI requested the advertiser to substantiate the claim with clinical data. In response to this request, the Advertiser responded stating that the treatment depends on the diagnosis, severity and stage of the arthritis, and as per condition of the patient, it may involve various stages. Even after the treatment, if there is no improvement or pain relief for the patient, they will evaluate further and will consider the patient for regenerative medicine. If the joints are deformed and arthritis is severe, not relieved with conservative management, Joint Replacement Surgeries are advised to the patients. Upon carefully viewing the print advertisement, examining the complaint and the response given by the advertiser, the CCC observed that the advertiser’s response has only assertions about their treatment. Pain is an individual response and so is relief experienced by patients. The CCC concluded that while there could be relief to patients from pain with various treatment modalities as explained, “To get permanent freedom from joint pains”, is an absolute claim which was not substantiated with supporting clinical evidence, and is misleading by gross exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.""

COMPANY: "VLCC Health Care Pvt Ltd"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"1. Reduce 2kg weight in just 7 hours. 2. No side effect 3. No crash diet. 4. No artificial food supplement 5. No appetite suppressant."

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 their Slimming programs are based on scientific principles. They deliver weight loss as per individual needs, health status and body composition. The rate of weight loss is carefully calibrated to safety limits as specified by WHO (0.5 kg to 1 kg per week). They provide to their customers a range of services from which the best combinations are provided to suit each individual need, ranging from diet counselling, fitness and health services, and lifestyle consulting, provided by a team of doctors, physiotherapists, nutritionists, trainers and psychologists. This 2 kg weight loss in 7 sessions of one hour each (7 hours) spread over 2 weeks, is in confirmity with the WHO guidelines of upto 1kg/ week weight loss. Further the advertisement mentions that there are detailed terms and conditions for the program. In support of their response, the advertiser provided the terms and conditions of the program and article/journal references on weight loss. Upon carefully viewing the print advertisement and the TVC, examining the complaint and the response given by the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the print advertisement claims, “Reduce 2 kg weight in just 7 hours. No side effect. No crash diet. No artificial food supplement. No appetite suppressant”, and the TVC claim, “Now loose 2 kgs in 7 hours only”, were not substantiated with supporting clinical evidence, and with treatment efficacy data among a statistically significant sample size in representative population, and are misleading by ambiguity regarding the treatment being over a period of several days and omission of details regarding the treatment modality. Claims, “Reduce 2 kg weight in just 7 hours”, and “Now loose 2 kgs in 7 hours only”, were misleading by implication that 2 kgs weight is lost in 7 consecutive hours. The print advertisement and the TVC contravened Chapters I.1and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.""

COMPANY: "Department of Tourism, Government of Kerala"
PRODUCT:"Kerala Tourism"

COMPLAINT:

“India’s Best Family Destination Lonely Planet”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"Objections: 1. The website mentions that the award “Lonely Planet Magazine India (LPMI) Travel Awards 2016” which is not mentioned in the advt. Thus there is an omission. 2. As per chapter 1.2 of ASCI code where advertising claims are expressly stated to be based on or supported by independent research or assessment, the source and date of this should be indicated in the advertisement. The advertiser has not mentioned the date in claim 1. According to us, the advertisement contravenes Chapter 1.1, 1.2 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 Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The CCC noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the prescribed due date for this complaint. The CCC verified the website and observed that the advertiser’s web-site provides details regarding the award for being “India’s Best Family Destination Lonely Planet” by Lonely Planet Magazine India (LPMI) Travel Awards 2016 (http://www.india.com/travel/articles/kerala-is-lonely-planets-best-family-destination-in-india-for-2016/ ) However, the award for 2017 appears to be Himachal Pradesh (https://www.brandwire.in/press-releases/print/98664631) . Based on this information, the CCC concluded that the claim, “India’s Best Family Destination Lonely Planet”, was false and misleading by omission of the reference to the year of the award. The complaint was UPHELD."

COMPANY: "Samsung French Door Refrigerator"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“Samsung website advertises of Rs. 1lacs 65k refrigerator model to have folding shelf. But the product does not have this benefit. Attached pdf of the website.” Link of advertisement: http://www.samsung.com/in/refrigerators/french-door-rf60j9090sl/ Additionally I raised this with Croma and Samsung and as per my telephonic conversation with Croma they were informed by Samsung that this model does not come with foldable shelf though Samsung's own website says it does! Based on this false advertisement of Samsung on this expensive model of refrigerator which costs Rs. 1lacs 75k rupees, other websites like Amazon also show that this model comes with foldable shelf. This is tantamount to cheating and fraud. Expectation from ASCI is that Samsung pull this advt of foldable shelf from their website and and tender me an unconditional written apology for in-correct advt On selling me something which doesn't have what they advertised I will take this case with someone else legally.

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 through their Advertising Agency. The Advertising Agency on behalf of the advertiser had stated in their response that the product with Item Code 'RF60J9090SL/TL', which is one of the products offered by their Client under the Product Range namely ""French Door Refrigerators (FDR)"" has four variants of FDRs, namely: a. RFS6K9040DP with capacity of 655L b. RFSOK5910DP with capacity of 594L c. RF28K9380SG with capacity of 826L d. RF60J9090SL with capacity of 680L Each variant has its own features and specifications which are specifically stated in the ""SPECS"" tab on the top of the website page. In support of their response, the advertising agency provided specifications of the product code RF60J9090SL/TL. Complainant provided evidence (Picture of the product purchased from the dealers which shows that the shelf depicted in the visual is not foldable, and Invoice from the dealers for this purchase for model RF60J9090SL). ASCI further offered the advertiser / advertising agency with an option for informal resolution of the complaint if they are agreeable to include an additional super in the visual stating the specific model number being depicted in the advertisement. As the advertising agency did not adhere to the extended timelines offered for informal resolution, the complaint was processed for CCC deliberations. Upon viewing the website advertisement, examining the complaint and the response given by the Advertising Agency, and based on the evidence submitted by the Complainant, the CCC concluded that the advertiser’s website showing the visual of two step foldable shelf of the refrigerator with the claims, “The Two Step Foldable Shelf slides in and out and can be folded up to create more room for larger bottles and tall or bulky containers.”, is false for the model RF60J9090SL as the web-site address header has a clear mention of this model which in reality does not have this feature. The CCC did not agree with the advertiser’s contention about the Disclaimers in the advertisement, “Key feature may different from Key Spec. Images shown here are for representational purpose only, actual may vary”, since the product model advertised should match with the actual model being sold. Visuals enticing consumers for purchase need to be truthful. The visual in the present case is misleading. The website advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code and Clause 2 of ASCI Guidelines for Disclaimers (“A disclaimer should not attempt to hide material information with respect to the claim, the omission / absence of which is likely to make the advertisement deceptive or conceal its commercial intent”). The complaint was UPHELD.""

COMPANY: "Milagrow Business & Knowledge Solutions"
PRODUCT:"Milagrow Robots"

COMPLAINT:

"1. Join the Robotic Revolution. 2. India’s 1st Live Mapping Floor Robot. 3. India’s Fastest Floor Robot. 4. India’s 1st Floating Battery Pool Robot. 5. World’s 1st Airpurifier cum Floor Robot. 6. India’s Quietest Floor Robot. 7. India’s 1st Lawn Mowing Robot. 8. Humans serving humans for menial jobs are history. Milagrow- India’s No.1 service robots brand is quietly creating a robotic revolution with its best robots for floor cleaning, lawn mowing, swimming pool cleaning, body massaging & tele presence. Come; join us in creating a new India."

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"1. Claims 1 to 8 need to be substantiated with independent reports 2. How does it claim “Robotic Revolution”? 3. Reference to claims 1 to 7. The advertiser needs to give details of the effectiveness, performance results of the study/ survey based on which these claims are made. According to us, the advertisement contravene 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 there were no competitors for consumer robots in India till they started their Milagrow Robots brand in the 3rd quarter of 2011. Even now in most of the categories there is no competition to them. There are no independent researches available in the domain due to it being a nascent category. The advertiser is the first brand in consumer/domestic robots in India. In support of their response, the advertiser provided a presentation showing different kinds of robots – swimming pool cleaning robots, lawn mowing robots, floor cleaning robots, multi-surface, multi-dimensional cleaning robots, humanoid and telepresence robots, which are being used by almost all major national and international brands of hotels. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the advertiser’s response and the presentation provided by the advertiser. Based on this data, and in the absence of any data contrary to the claims made, the CCC concluded that the claims, “India’s 1st Live Mapping Floor Robot”, “India’s 1st Floating Battery Pool Robot”, “World’s 1st Airpurifier cum Floor Robot”, “India’s 1st Lawn Mowing Robot” were not objectionable. The claims “Join the Robotic Revolution”, “Humans serving humans for menial jobs are history. Milagrow- India’s No.1 service robots brand is quietly creating a robotic revolution with its best robots for floor cleaning, lawn mowing, swimming pool cleaning, body massaging & tele presence. Come; join us in creating a new India” were considered as puffery. This complaint was NOT UPHELD. The CCC noted that the advertiser is also willing to directly provide any information being sought by the complainant. The CCC concluded that the claims, “India’s Fastest Floor Robot”, and “India’s Quietest Floor Robot”, were not substantiated with technical test report comparing the advertised product with other brands in India. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. This complaint was UPHELD.""

COMPANY: "Lotus Slimming Centre"
PRODUCT:"Figure First"

COMPLAINT:

"1. Redefine yourself- weight loss, Inch loss, skin and Hair clinic. 2. 28 days, 20 sessions loss up to 20 inches. 3. Weight loss, Inch Loss, Skin treatment, Laser Hair removal, Hair treatment, Lipo 4D 4. No side effects, No pain, we are using DIODE Laser. 5. Individual Guidance by Certified Doctors for Every Treatment. 6. Reduce weight up to 6 kgs in one month."

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

""1. Claims 1 to 6 need to be substantiated with data from independent scientific studies. 2. How can one redefine oneself by weight loss, Inch loss, skin and Hair treatment? Please Explain. 3. How can it be claimed that one can lose up to 20 inches in 20 sessions as everyone has different body metabolism. 4. “No side effect and no pain”- is it substantiated by an independent report? 5. Is DIODE Laser treatment certified to be effective by an independent Agency? 6. Is DIODE Laser treatment certified to be safe by an independent Agency? 7. “Individual Guidance by Certified Doctors for Every Treatment” – are these doctors certified by any registered medical institute? 8. The claim- “reduce up to 6 kgs in one month” is grossly misleading. Can everyone reduce up to 6 kgs? Is it substantiated by any research data? What are the terms and conditions for this? Any weight loss would be achieved only by diet control and exercise. Why is this information omitted? According to us, the advertisement contravenes Chapter 1.1, 1.4 and 1.5 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 claim that one can lose upto 20 inches in 20 sessions is on the basis of their experience and knowhow of metabolism of a customer. The claim of upto 6 kg, in their day to day counseling and detailed counseling at the time of admission is on the basis of their vast business experience. Diet control, exercise and many other parameters are supportive factors for weight loss but their treatment is the core part for reducing the weight. The CCC viewed the advertisement and considered the advertiser’s response. The CCC observed that the advertiser’s response has only assertions about their treatment. Advertiser did not provide details of the treatment procedure for weight reduction, nor any weight loss data based on rigorous trial on statistically significant number of patients to establish the benefits of the therapy being provided. The CCC concluded that the claims, “28 days, 20 sessions loss up to 20 inches”, “No side effects, No pain, we are using DIODE Laser”, and “Reduce weight up to 6 kgs in one month”, were not substantiated with supporting clinical evidence, and with treatment efficacy data, and are misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1and I.4 of the ASCI Code. This complaint was UPHELD The CCC concluded that the claims, “Redefine yourself- weight loss, Inch loss, skin and Hair clinic”, “Weight loss, Inch Loss, Skin treatment, Laser Hair removal, Hair treatment, Lipo 4D”, “Individual Guidance by Certified Doctors for Every Treatment”were not objectionable, as these are the services provided by the advertiser. This complaint was NOT UPHELD.""

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

COMPLAINT:

"Claims objected to in TVC: 1) Diabetes Care Oil. 2) Oil from Wagga Wagga where air, water and soil is pure. 3) Use oil without worrying about sugar levels 4) Taste and health together 5) No Pollution. 6) No GM seeds. 7) No Chemicals. 8) Recommended for all diabetes patient. 9) Wagga Wagga oil claims to control Blood Sugar. 10) If you want to control sugar change your oil to Wagga Wagga. 11) The Australian that helps control blood sugar. Objections • Has the oil been certified by a reputed independent agency as being good for diabetics? • Is the claim “No GM seeds” certified by an independent authority? • How does the oil helps to control Blood Sugar as compared to other normal oils? • Is this Wagga Wagga oil good for the entire family, including children? • Claim 3 is dangerous and misleading. Even if the oil is clean, pure and has no GM seeds, oil cannot be used by diabetics in excess. High intake of oil will ultimately increase sugar levels. • The advt promotes dangerous practice of consuming fried and junk food without worrying about health. • Can the company substantiate claims 1 to 11 by giving reports from independent agencies? According to us, the advertisement contravenes Chapter 1.1, 1.4 and 1.5 of ASCI code Action to be taken” Complaint 2: (from consumer) Claims objected to in print Ad “To put it plain and simple, Wagga Wagga Diabetes Care Oil is clean at heart and good for diabetes”, “Helps in managing Type 2 diabetes”, “No chemicals”, “No GM Seeds”, “No Pollution” “Recently, I came across an advertisement for Wagga Wagga oil in the Times of India dated July 17, 2017. The advertisement was for imported Refined Rapeseed Low Erucic Acid Oil (Canola Oil) and the same was referred to as a diabetes care oil. The said advertisement is false and misleading. Firstly, the advertisement is making nutrition related health claims that consumption of the said oil shall & to put it plain and simple, Wagga Wagga Diabetes Care Oil is clean at heart and good for diabetes & It is surprising that if a medicinal drug is not permitted to advertise as having the efficacy to alleviate diseases such as diabetes, how an edible oil maybe permitted to do the same. They further say that Wagga Wagga oil helps in manage Type 2 diabetes. The advertisement further gives an impression that the said oil is a replacement for diabetes medicine, which cannot under any circumstance be considered as correct and true. In the alternative, it seeks to give an impression that by consuming this oil the onset of diabetes shall be mitigated. This cannot be correct. Secondly, the advertisement claims that the Wagga Wagga oil has No Chemical Any product which is a refined edible vegetable oil has to undergo a refining process which mandates using some chemicals to extract oil. Therefore their claim of chemical free is a false claim Thirdly, the use of GM seeds has to be disclosed by the manufacturer on the packaging itself as per the Legal Metrology (Packaged Commodities) Rules 2011. I have checked and have not found GM seed declaration on any of the leading edible oil products. Such a statement appears to be only giving the Company an unfair advantage. Fourthly, it is very unclear what they mean by No Pollution in the advertisement. Such fanciful terms which have no relevance and give an incorrect import cannot be permitted in an advertisement. This is also against the interest of India as they are boasting that seed from Canada is pollution free and seeds grown in India is of very inferior quality and has lot of pollution. It`s against national interest.”"

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. It was also brought to the attention of the advertiser that these are additional complaints received further to complaint 1708 – C.907 The advertiser had stated in their response that Wagga Wagga Diabetes Care oil is a 100% Canola oil made from non GMO seeds. The samples and lab reports and the consequent FSSAI certification conducted on the oil imported confirm that it is 100% Canola Oil. Canola oil has a high percentage of Monounsaturated fatty acids (MUFA), which in normal parlance are termed as “good fats”. The health claim under scrutiny is that the said product helps control diabetes. The said claim is based upon proven effectiveness of Canola oil on diabetics due to its high percentage of MUFA. Additionally, the phrase ‘Diabetes Care’ merely suggests that the said product should be a part of health care regime (which includes a balanced diet) to prevent and help control diabetes. 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. The advertiser imports the product from Riverina Oils and BioEnergy Pty Ltd., Australia. The oil extraction is done from Canola Seed / Rapeseed grown in ‘Wagga Wagga’ region, New South Wales, Australia. Their seeds are grown in a radius of 100 km from the factory of Riverina Oils and BioEnergy Pty Ltd. The aspect of ‘No Pollution’ covers three areas – air, water, and soil at the place of manufacture. 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, Laboratory report of Australian Government for grain results of the product, customs copy, certificate of compliance – non GMO project verified, reference on Pesticide and Agrochemical monitory activities in Australia, SGS Test report, certificate of analysis, Review article on Mono unsaturated fatty acids for CVD and diabetes: A healthy choice, and a copy of bill of entry corresponding to the said import from Riverina Oils and BioEnergy Pty Ltd. The claim support data submitted by the advertiser was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC carefully examined the complaints, the TVC, 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 – Some of the claims related to “diabetes care” have already been dealt with in complaint 1708 – C.907 and those CCC recommendations also hold in the present case – which are being re-produced here. “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. 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.” Over and above the CCC recommendation above, the CCC further observed that the Claims, “Use oil without worrying about sugar levels” , recommended for all diabetic patients, and visual implying that one can eat food such as “tikki” without restrictions (“…Soch mat Kuljeet….” ) is a serious claim and in absence of any caution or warning could misguide the diabetic patient since Oil when taken in excess is also harmful, especially to Diabetics. In the Indian market place there are other vegetable oils – such as Rice bran oil with Oryzanol, Sunflower oil, Olive oil – all with high MUFA content. Medical profession is advising patients to change cooking oils frequently to get their maximum benefits. There are also blended oils available in the market with high MUFA content and low SFA. Since the advertiser has not presented a comparative study report of their Canola oil vs oils available in the market, the claims were inadequately substantiated. 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. For claim, “Oil from Wagga Wagga where air, water and soil is pure” - Advertiser provided Air quality Index shot , monthly graph , soil quality and confirming the quality of water. For claim, “No Pollution” - Advertiser provided details about the import source of Canola oil i.e. Riverina Oils and BioEnergy Pty Ltd., Australia, the air , soil ,water quality at the place of cultivation and manufacture and the method of processing [expeller pressed]. For claim, “No GM seeds” – the advertiser provided a Non GMO certification from the manufacturer ( https://www.nongmoproject.org/find-non-gmo/verified-products/results/?brandId=9867 ) as well as bill of entry for the non-GMO oil. Advertiser also states that Wagga Wagga Diabetes care oil is 100 % expeller pressed with no chemical treatment and for the claim, “No Chemicals”- Advertiser provided analytical report to show absence of Antioxidants – TBHQ and DMPS and absence of residual pesticides. Based on this data, the CCC did not consider these claims to be objectionable. A stand alone claim of “Taste and Health together” (i.e. without reference to diabetes) was not considered objectionable. These complaints were NOT UPHELD.""

COMPANY: "Pepsico India Holdings Pvt. Ltd"
PRODUCT:"Tropicana"

COMPLAINT:

"Billboard Advertisement by tropicana at Pedder Road Mumbai, that misleads ppl into thinking that 1 serve of juice is equal to 1 serve of fruits & veggies each"

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 submitted their written response. The advertiser had stated in their response that Tropicana Essentials Fruit & Veggies (200 ml) contains 148 ml of fruit juice (apple juice) & 56 ml of vegetable juice (beetroot juice + carrot juice). 100 g of apple fruit (1 serve) gives 75 — 80% apple juice and 100 g vegetables (1 serve) (beetroot and carrot) gives 44 — 46% juice which is as per industrial practice and certification from the globally reputed suppliers. Therefore, a 200 ml pack of Tropicana Essentials Fruit & Veggies requires 80 ml apple juice and 46 ml of vegetables juice to be compliant to the claim. Every pack of Tropicana Essentials Fruit & Veggies (200 ml) provides approximately 148 ml of apple juice (juice from 1.8 serves of apple) and 56 ml of vegetable juice (juice from 1.1 serve of vegetables) which is much more than the claimed amount. The CCC viewed the Ad – Hoarding and considered the advertiser’s response. The CCC concluded that the claim, ""Juice of 1 serve of fruit and veggies each"", when read in conjunction with pack shot and disclaimers therein, ""Fruit and vegetable juice equivalence based on fruit and vegetable portions of 100g for a 200 ml serve size of beverage"", and the mention of “Source of Vitamin A and C” was not misleading. The complaint was NOT UPHELD.""

COMPANY: "Chemical Resources"
PRODUCT:"(Fenfuro)"

COMPLAINT:

"1. Fenfuro supports healthy glucose levels. 2. Supported by six international patents: • Europe: A Novel Anti- Diabetic Furostanolic-Saponins Rich (FSR) Fraction From Fengureek seeds. • USA : A Novel process for the extraction of Furostanolic-Saponins From Fengureek seeds. • Africa: A Novel Anti- Diabetic Furostanolic-Saponins Rich (FSR) Fraction From Fengureek seeds. • China: A Novel Anti- Diabetic Furostanolic-Saponins Rich (FSR) Fraction From Fengureek seeds. 3. Clinically evaluated. 1. Fenfuro supports healthy glucose levels. 2. Supported by six international patents: • Europe: A Novel Anti- Diabetic Furostanolic-Saponins Rich (FSR) Fraction From Fengureek seeds. • USA : A Novel process for the extraction of Furostanolic-Saponins From Fengureek seeds. • Africa: A Novel Anti- Diabetic Furostanolic-Saponins Rich (FSR) Fraction From Fengureek seeds. • China: A Novel Anti- Diabetic Furostanolic-Saponins Rich (FSR) Fraction From Fengureek seeds. 3. Clinically evaluated. 4. Published in well known journals (Pubmed, FASEB,IJMS,WJPR) 5. Single ingredient product ensuring consistent quality of each capsule 6. Proven safe and effective 7. Not for medicinal use"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"1. Claim 1 needs to be substantiated with independent studies? 2. How is ‘Furostanolic-Saponins Rich (FSR) Fraction from Fengureek seeds’ able to impact readers and retain healthy glucose levels in consumers? Please substantiate 3. The source date and details of the journals have not been mentioned. This violated chapter 1.2 of the ASCI code. 4. In claim1 the product claims to support healthy glucose levels. Yet in claim 7 “Not for medicinal use” is stated. This is a contradiction. Please explain 5. The claim “clinically evaluated” needs to be substantiated by independent scientific studies. 6. Can the company substantiate claims 1 to 7 by giving reports from independent agencies? According to us, the advertisement contravenes Chapter 1.1, 1.2 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 Fenfuro is supported with clinical trial on 154 subjects conducted by Govt. of India medical university, and that the complete study has been submitted to FSSAI and the study is also available in public domain. They have given the titles of the patents granted to them by various countries, and these are not any claims. The product is clinically evaluated and studies have been published in many international journals which can be viewed in public domain. The advertiser has been granted necessary patents wherein furostanolic saponins rich fraction from fenugreek seeds is clearly mentioned. Fenfuro is a health supplement/nutraceutical and it is not a drug. Hence the clarification “Not For Medicinal Use” is clearly mentioned in the said advertisement. As this response was inadequate without the relevant claim support data, ASCI requested the advertiser to provide supporting data for the claims made. Advertiser did not provide this data in time for the meeting. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the advertiser’s response. The CCC observed that the advertiser’s response has only assertions about their product and claim support. The advertiser did not submit product specific details such as composition / licence / pack artwork or samples and more importantly, FSSAI approval for all the claims being made in the advertisement. The CCC expressed their concern for promotion of this “food” product with therapeutic claims implying anti-diabetic benefits ( e.g. reference to “Novel anti-diabetic Furostanolic-Saponins-Rich fraction…”) and with the claim “Clinically evaluated”, “proven safe and effective”. The CCC concluded that the claims, “Fenfuro supports healthy glucose levels”, “Clinically evaluated” and “Proven safe and effective”, were not substantiated with clinical evidence for product efficacy, and are misleading by exaggeration. Claims, “Published in well known journals (Pubmed, FASEB,IJMS,WJPR)”, “Supported by six international patents: • Europe: A Novel Anti- Diabetic Furostanolic-Saponins Rich (FSR) Fraction From Fengureek seeds. • USA : A Novel process for the extraction of Furostanolic-Saponins From Fengureek seeds. • Africa: A Novel Anti- Diabetic Furostanolic-Saponins Rich (FSR) Fraction From Fengureek seeds. • China: A Novel Anti- Diabetic Furostanolic-Saponins Rich (FSR) Fraction From Fengureek seeds”, and “Published in well known journals (Pubmed, FASEB,IJMS,WJPR)”, were not substantiated with supporting evidence, and are misleading by ambiguity regarding the aspect of patent (whether it is a novel ingredient or only a novel process) being referred to by inconsistency in the information provided in the advertisement. The claims implying therapeutic benefits, but the advertisement mentioning “Not for medicinal use”, is misleading by ambiguity. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. The CCC did not consider the claim “Single ingredient product ensuring consistent quality of each capsule”, to be objectionable. This complaint was NOT UPHELD.""

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

COMPLAINT:

"Fast Track complaint received against the TVC, Print Ad, Social Media marketing, Website/Internet advertisement of “Dabur India Ltd – Dabur Odomos”, from S.C. Johnson Products Pvt. Ltd. The Advertising Campaign for ""Dabur Odomos - 99.9% protection"" being run and promoted by the Advertiser is false, misleading to the consumers, incorrect on facts and data, deceptive and fallacious as further discussed below. 1. The 99.9% protection claim is false. The 99.9% claim is misleading and incorrect to the extent the products used for comparison cannot appropriately be compared. The products' delivery mechanism, mode of action and recommended use are completely different. The LVPs (Liquid Vaporiser) and Coils generally start showing results after 30 mins of their usage per the Central Insecticide Board recommendation, whereas the repellent cream of the Advertiser may start to work immediately. The study conducted is for a period of 30 minutes, during which time the other products used for comparison (LVP and Coil) have not even started their effects. The LVPs and Coils cannot be compared for efficacy in the first 30 minutes. In addition, for the Advertiser's product, the claim of protection may only be made where the repellent has been applied. In the commercial, the repellent was only applied on the exposed skin. It is well known in the pest control industry and scientific community that mosquitoes have the ability to bite through many types of clothing. The Advertiser's product cannot provide 99.9% protection to the individuals shown in the commercial, because they have only applied the repellent to a small area of their bodies. Hence, in the given scenario the 99.9% protection claim made by the Advertiser is incorrect, misleading and scientifically inaccurate. 2. The Advertiser does not accurately compare the efficacy of the products. The Advertiser's product is solely a mosquito repellent, which is effective only to repel the landing of mosquitoes, and not probing orbiting. On the other hand, LVPs and Coils work on eradicating the mosquitoes by attacking their nervous systems, thereby killing them. In addition, the Advertiser's product is only effective on the specific areas it has been applied to and may work for up to approximately 6.5 hours as per the World Health Organization Pesticide Evaluation Scheme (""WHOPES"") 2009.4 guidelines.' In contrast, the Coils work for up to 12 hours and the LVPs will work until it is turned off by the consumer A disclaimer describing the differences in efficacy and duration is not mentioned on the product label or in the Advertising Campaign. In fact, there is no guarantee of any protection with the Advertiser's product after approx. 5-6 hours (Indian J Med Res. 2011 Apr; 133(4): 426-430) of use. 3. The Advertiser's study is inaccurate and was not conducted in accordance with industry standards. The alleged NABL Laboratory study conducted by the Advertiser does not accurately reflect the conditions shown in the television commercial, which was purportedly under controlled laboratory conditions which cannot be equated to the conditions out in the field, per the World Health Organization guidelines. Moreover, as shown in the television commercial, including only one person in each of the three chambers with LVP, Coil and repellent respectively is too small of a sample size for such an experiment and clearly does not represent the demographics of the entire Nation (As per WHOPES 2009.4). In addition, the Impugned Advertisement omits information regarding the effective dose of repellent that is required to protect the human volunteer shown in the commercial, and does not reflect the amount of dosage used to achieve the claimed results (as per WHOPES guidelines). 4. Human subjects selected and depicted for the Laboratory Test are not correct per the WHOPES 2009 Guidelines The impugned advertisement is clearly misleading as the depicted wounds are improperly exaggerated and larger than typical mosquito bites. This depiction, in addition to the language regarding disease, is evidence of fear mongering. This is significant because the Advertiser is clearly inducing the sale of its product based on consumer fear and not actual product efficacy or performance, thereby depriving consumers of free and informed choice. Indeed, the Advertiser has cleverly only shown the wounds and bites on the hand of the first person in the room with the LVP, and has omitted to show the wounds and bites on the other two test subjects. This further supports an unfair and frightening impression in the minds of the customers associated with the LVPs and Coils. Further, according to the WHOPES 2009.4 guidelines, human volunteers selected for skin applied repellent studies must be candidates exhibiting mild or no sensitivity to mosquito bites. If the Advertiser argues that these grossly exaggerated wounds and bites are typical, the only conclusion is that the Advertiser used highly sensitive volunteers, which is a violation of professional medical ethics. 5. Tag line ""sirf Dabur Odomos deta hai Dengue failane wale macchron se 99.9% suraksha"" is an incorrect statement The Advertiser's tagline implies that its product is the only one that can provide 99.9% protection to the exclusion of all other competitive products in the market. However, in actuality, according to the Indian Journal of Med research, 2011 Apr; 133(4): 426-430, the active ingredient (DBA) provides only similar results in comparison to the other competitive products made of DEET. Therefore, for example, products containing the active ingredient DEET can also provide high levels of protection from mosquitoes, and especially mosquitoes that may carry diseases such as dengue. Thus this comparative claim is false.”"

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, print advertisement, Website 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. The claim 99.9% protection at the end of 30 minutes was substantiated. This complaint was NOT UPHELD. 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”, ""sirf Dabur Odomos deta hai Dengue failane wale macchron se 99.9% suraksha"" were not substantiated. The FTCP noted that while the advertiser has suspended the TVC with these objected claims, the web-site advertisement continues to have the claim “To find a product that gives BEST protection against mosquitoes…” . The FTCP further observed that while the TVC is in the context of protection being provided for the first 30 minutes, the claim continues to exist in the Facebook communication / other digital platforms. Furthermore, the web-site communication has the following claim “In the fight against Dengue, India can now be 99.9% safe”. The claim was considered to be misleading by ambiguity, omission and exaggeration. This complaint was UPHELD.""

 

 

DID YOU KNOW?