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

Select Month :

 
ASCI Recommendations
 

COMPANY: Nutricia International Pvt. Ltd
PRODUCT: Protinex Health Drink

COMPLAINT:

"80% Indian Diet are Protein Deficient"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Advertisement starts with telling about survey, that "80% Indian Diet are Protein Deficient" and then our regular diet isn't sufficient for protein. 1) So I just want to know is which survey shows that "80% Indian diet are protein deficient". and on what basis survey were conducted. 2) Could you please provide that which under which authority survey was conducted? 3) Could you please provide which regular diet does not have sufficient protein? Could you please provide in percentage unit? 4) Could you please provide survey report ?

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The advertiser representatives were given personal hearing by the ASCI. The claim support data was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC viewed the TVC and considered the Advertiser’s response for Review as well as opinion of the Technical expert presented at the meeting. As claim support data, the advertiser has provided a research study that they conducted via IMRB. The CCC noted that the survey methodology was 24 hour recall method. This survey methodology was not considered to be a robust method, unlike a diary method, as it could give inaccurate results for quantification of the actual intake of protein rich food. Presenting the survey results as “80% of Indian diets are protein deficient” based on a limited survey was therefore considered to be inadequately substantiated and misleading by exaggeration. The survey did not cover incidence of protein deficiency. The CCC concluded that the presentation of the advertisement was likely to mislead by implying that protein deficient diet as determined by the 24 hour recall survey would result in Protein deficiency, when that was not the case. The claim, “And your regular diet isn’t sufficient to meet your daily protein requirement”, was considered to be misleading by implication, as it implies that Protinex is a replacement for regular diet. The TVC contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the Code. The decision of complaint being Upheld stands on Review.

COMPANY: CATKing
PRODUCT: CAT Bookset

COMPLAINT:

“CAT bookset prepared by CAT Toppers”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: NOT UPHELD

The advertiser representatives were given personal hearing by ASCI. The CCC viewed the website advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response for Review. As claim support data, the Advertiser provided CAT score cards of CAT Toppers, and their confirmation emails to support that they have contributed in the preparation of the CAT Bookset. The CCC concluded that the claim, “CAT bookset prepared by CAT Toppers”, was substantiated. The decision is Not Upheld on Review.

 

COMPANY: The Indian Express (P) Ltd
PRODUCT: The Financial Express

COMPLAINT:

We would like to bring to your attention a very misleading advertisement by Financial Express that addresses the advertising and marketing community promoting its website. They have chosen to use data metrics that are not usually used. In the digital space, only Unique Visitors and Page Views are two primary metrics for evaluation. For a more involved audience, the time spent on the site is also used to compare websites from similar genres. With the usage of data about visits by FE.com and mentioning it as fine print is rather misleading. The fact remains that on key parameters such as unique visitors and page views, Financial Express is way below the pecking order. I have attached an excel sheet report generated from Comscore for your ready reference. I have also appended the misleading communication by Financial Express. I would urge you to take this up as a complaint and take appropriate action.

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: NOT UPHELD

The advertisement does not make a claim of “leadership”, and the parameter has been clearly mentioned in the advertisement. The complaint was NOT UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: Emami Limited
PRODUCT: Fair & Handsome

COMPLAINT:

“Long Lasting Fairness”, “Instant Brightness”, “Dark Spots Reduction”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

For the claim of "Long lasting fairness", measurements were done instrumentally by CHROMAMETRY and showed 165% variations above baseline of L8 and ITA values at T+28. Post four week usage, 82% panelists agree to the statement that "the product gives long lasting fairness." This was considered to be a test of sustained performance with continued usage ("evolution in time"), and not “long-lasting fairness after stoppage of use”. From the test report, the fairness test does not appear to have been done some days after stoppage of use, hence the claim of “long-lasting fairness” was not substantiated. The advertisement contravened Chapter I.1 of the Code. This complaint was UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: I.T.C Limted
PRODUCT: Bingo Tedhe Medhe namkeen

COMPLAINT:

This is an ad in which a girl is running behind a departing train to catch it and ask and ask for her friend to help her get in the running train,as to which her friend is busy eating bingo and says tedhe medhe. There are lots of cases going all over that people are crushed in tracks while boarding a running train and the government is already trying for awareness regarding this issue. So I think that such provoking ads should be banned

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: NOT UPHELD

The CCC viewed the TVC and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser states that the TVC is an obvious exaggeration intended to catch the eye of the consumer. It is a clear parody of the popular cinematic trope and should be viewed in that perspective only. The CCC concluded that the visual of “a girl running behind a departing train to catch it and asks her friend for help” is a spoof of certain movie scenes and consumers would easily relate to those movie situations. The complaint was NOT UPHELD.

COMPANY: Colorbar Cosmetics Pvt. Ltd
PRODUCT: Colorbar U.S.A. Hydra White Intense Whitening Hydrating Day Lotion

COMPLAINT:

Usage Results: • 70% felt an increase in skin brightness, freshness and radiance • 75% felt their skin tone looked more clear • 80% agreed their skin remained hydrated all day long • 80% loved the light-weight texture Our PATENTED Illumeskin Whitening Complex* is proven to illuminate your skin tone by minimizing existing dark spots and providing a renewed surge of long-lasting hydration. * Patent Pending

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The CCC viewed the product packaging and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser argues that the claims of “Usage Results” is the basis of an internal self-assessment study conducted only on 20 female consumers. The advertiser has provided examples of certain competitor products making efficacy claims. The CCC noted that the advertiser has used a small sample size of 20 consumers to derive the product benefit claims. This sample size is neither statistically significant, nor reliable especially for a perception based claims. The CCC concluded that the claims of Usage Results: “70% felt an increase in skin brightness, freshness and radiance”, “75% felt their skin tone looked more clear”, “80% agreed their skin remained hydrated all day long”, “80% loved the light-weight texture”, were not substantiated and were likely to mislead consumers. The product packaging contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. This complaint was UPHELD. The advertiser mentions the word “PATENTED” on the pack, and by way of a disclaimer, states that the “patent is pending”. Advertiser argues that this seems to be an industry practice and they have cited an example of a competitor product. The CCC noted that the Advertiser has not provided proof/data to substantiate that their patent has been applied and is pending. The CCC did not agree that examples quoted of similar claim/s by competitor products can be an accepted precedence as these claims by competitors have not been scrutinized by CCC. The CCC acknowledged that an article shall be deemed to have had obtained a patent in India, if the article is engraved, stamped or impressed with the words “patent” or “patented”. Based on these facts, the CCC concluded that the claim “Our PATENTED Illumeskin Whitening Complex* (*Patent pending)” on product packaging was not substantiated and was misleading by implication. The pack communication contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. This complaint was UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: TTK Protective Devices Ltd
PRODUCT: Skore condoms

COMPLAINT:

Number of complaints-5 Complaint no.1 Skore condom women hides condom at airport checking Security. The police women checks another women who is carrying condom box. She touches her breast the line in between both the nipples/breast. Complaint no.2 A lady is seen thoroughly checked by another security women personnel, removing a condom packet which is tucked in the belt of the lady's jeans. Visually it is quite obscene on a family channel n definitely the dialogues invite lot of speculation n unnecessary questions in the minds of young n growing up children. Complaint no. 3 There is a add of score condom in which two ladies are there. The add shows the lady touching the other lady which is not be vewiable.The add clearly shows the lady touching the side of breast and other private portion. The advertisement contain many activity which can't be viewable .please take a necessary action on it Complaint no.4 The advertisement depicts a young woman enjoys being searched by police, who find the condom in her possession. The search procedure is shown very closely in detail as the camera moves along with the police officer's hand, in the woman's body. The advertisement shows the police officers hands moving along the woman's body, even her private parts, and depicts the woman to be enjoying herself. It's really awkward and vulgar to watch this with kids, when it comes in the movie break, when the whole family is in front of the t.v. it should be given some adult rating so that it is not telecasted during family movie times. Complaint no.5 A lady searcher body searches a woman passanger suggestively in an airport terminal The ad's visuals are completely erotic, the ad was aired during comedy nights with kapil show, 24.01.16 night which is a family show, it promotes lesbianism which is presently unlawful in India, It shows the profession of Lady Searcher, a post under Indian Customs in a bad light.

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: NOT UPHELD

The CCC viewed the TVC and considered the Advertising Agency’s response. The CCC concluded that the frisking of a lady passenger by a lady security officer being depicted in the advertisement may make some viewers uncomfortable. However, they were not likely to cause grave and widespread offence. The complaints were NOT UPHELD.

COMPANY: Hindustan Unilever Ltd.
PRODUCT: Dove Hair Fall Rescue Shampoo with Nutrilock Actives

COMPLAINT:

1) “MISLEADING COMMUNICATION: The TVC begins with asking “How many hair strands do you lose every day?” / Har Din Aapke kitne Baal Girte Hain?” The above conversation refers to “NORMAL / NATURAL HAIR FALL” women experience which is shown to be varied from 50 to 100 to 150, and the same is clearly not an indicative of HAIR FALL DUE TO HAIR BREAKAGE. The next shot comes with the claim on screen and voice over “Stop Counting falling hair / Ab girte balon ko ginna bhool jaeye”. This communication shown is completely misguiding as now the communication is with respect to hair fall due to hair breakage while the TVC begins on the note of talking about NORMAL / NATURAL HAIR FALL, which is a known fact, leaving behind an impression on the consumers assumptions / belief system that the product works on NORMAL / NATURAL HAIR FALL and not only on Hair fall due to breakage. This is completely misleading the consumers to believe that usage of shampoo will reduce normal hair fall which may not only be due to breakage. There is no qualifier for reduction in NORMAL/NATURAL HAIR FALL as the number of hair strands spoken about at the beginning of the TVC i.e. 50/100/150 is not substantiated through any super. While the TVC further progresses reaching to the end part the advertiser claims “Ab girte balon ki ginti ho band” with the same numerical figures on screen, as shown initially i.e. 50/100/150, implying that the use of the shampoo will 100% stop both types of hair fall as referred above i.e. hair fall due to hair breakage and normal hair fall. This is an outrageously exaggerated claim and needs scientific and clinical validation. The qualifiers used to support claims are only with respect to Hair Fall due to Hair Breakage and nowhere the support for “NATURAL/NORMAL HAIR FALL” is used in the commercial. The advertiser is asked to provide valid substantiation for such tall claims made by him in the TVC. 2) MISLEADING CLAIM: Nourishes Damaged Hair From Roots Up / Yeh damage balon ko jadon se upar poshan de aur unhe banaye siron se majboot The advertiser claims to deliver nourishment to damaged hair from roots up. We would like the advertiser to substantiate how a shampoo which is designed to clean up, provide nourishment to its users. We would like the advertiser to provide details with respect to the formulation technology and active ingredients mode of action that penetrates into the roots and provides nourishment to damaged hair thus making them strong along with lab tests, clinical study reports to support nourishment to damaged hair. Moreover, the super provided in the Advertisement does not talk about in which laboratory the product was tested to provide such reliefs and also the date of such testing is missing from the Advertisement. It just mentions “Lab Test Par Aadharit, Tootne Ke Kaaran Hair Fall Vs. Non – Conditioning Shampoo” Considering the above facts, we would like to draw your kind attention that the entire storyline in TVC focuses mainly on Hair Fall and Nourishment from root up, to damaged hair. The communication is highly misleading as the voice over, claims on screen/shots and super does not correlate at all and the claims are unsubstantiated and hence misleading.

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The claim support data was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC viewed the print advertisement, the TVC, and considered the Advertiser’s response as well as opinion of the Technical expert presented at the meeting. The CCC noted that the opening shots of the advertisement refer to hair fall in the range of 50 to 150 and this correspond to physiological hair loss and not called out as hair fall due to breakage.. While the disclaimers in the print ad and the TV indicate the product is addressing the problem of hair breakage the overall advertisements/voice-over refer to "hair fall" thus creating ambiguity. Advertiser states that by showing Dove action on the hair shaft, and also the root, it is implied that breakage is being referred to. The CCC concluded that the advertisement is misleading by ambiguity because consumer will believe that Dove will also reduce natural hair fall; Whereas the context of product benefit is with reference to hair fall due to breakage, as specified in the disclaimer. The print advertisement and the TVC contravened Chapter I.4 of the ASCI Code. This complaint was UPHELD. As for the claim, “Yeh damage balon ko jadon se upar poshan de aur unhe banaye siron se majboot” (“Nourishes Damaged Hair From Roots Up”), the advertiser has provided in-house lab report and also literature compilation which shows penetration of lysine, sunflower oil and glycerin into the hair-shaft and roots. The CCC concluded that this claim when seen in conjunction with the visual of hair strand being nourished above scalp level (not roots) was substantiated. This complaint was NOT UPHELD for the TVC. However, the claim as used in the print advertisement was considered to be misleading by ambiguity and implication that the product is effective of physiological hair loss. The print advertisement contravened Chapter I.4 of the ASCI Code. This complaint was UPHELD.

COMPANY: Sojatia Competition
PRODUCT: Classes

COMPLAINT:

1. 63 selections in NLUs 2. All India Level Test Series & Online Testing. Comparison of CLAT 2015 with others and IPM with other competitors.

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. As claims support data, the Advertiser provided a list of their students selected in NLUs and top schools, and copy of invoice from Career Lift to show their tie up with them. Advertiser states that comparison of CLAT-2015 of IPM course is done by gathering the available data locally. The CCC concluded that the claims, “63 selections in NLUs”, “All India Level Test Series & Online Testing”, and Comparison of CLAT 2015 with others and IPM with other competitors, were not substantiated with authentic supporting data. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapter I.1 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: IMS Learning Resources Pvt. Ltd.
PRODUCT: CAT 2015 Results

COMPLAINT:

“More than 30% students got 90+ % ile”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: NOT UPHELD

The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. As claims support data, the Advertiser provided certificate issued by Chartered Accountant duly verifying the documentary evidence in support of the claim, and scorecards of students who have scored more than 90 percentile. The CCC concluded that the claim, “More than 30% students got 90+ % ile”, was substantiated. The complaint was NOT UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: Ban Labs Ltd
PRODUCT: Sesa Oil

COMPLAINT:

“8X”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. The Advertiser argues that by saying “8X”, they mean that their product helps to fight 8 problems related to scalp & hair disorders. ASCI had also advised the Advertiser to provide substantiation for the claims referring to the eight benefits being offered by the product. No data was received from the advertiser in time for the meeting. The CCC concluded that the claim of “8X” referring to the 8 benefits of the product were not substantiated. The advertisement contravened Chapter I.1 of the Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: Cargill India Pvt. Ltd
PRODUCT: Leonardo Olive Oil

COMPLAINT:

“1/3rd oil usage, makes it light”, “Helps in improving digestion”, “Improves metabolic health”, “Increases good cholesterol”, “Maintains sugar levels”, “Controls weight and waist line” “High MUFA content -75%”, “Trans – fat free”, “Zero cholesterol”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The advertiser was granted an extension of five days to the standard lead time of five days to submit their reply in response to their request for extension of 30 days. The advertiser sought a personal meeting with the ASCI Secretariat but could not attend on the date and time fixed for the meeting. However, as desired by them, a 45 minutes telecon was organized of their team with the ASCI Secretariat and the technical expert. As claims support data, the advertiser provided reports issued by Department Oils, Oleochemicals and Surfactants Technology, Mumbai University Institute of Chemical Technology; FareLabs reports; details of survey conducted by Nutritionist Republic; and individual reports issued by independent nutritionists. The claim support data was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response as well as opinion of the Technical expert presented at the meeting. The CCC concluded that - Claim – “1/3 oil usage, Makes it light” This claim is not acceptable since the sensory results presented are not statistically significant as compared to other cooking oils. The advertisement contravened Chapter I.1 of the Code. This complaint was UPHELD. Claims - “Improves Metobolic Health”, “Increases Good Cholesterol”, “Maintains sugar levels”, “Controls weight and waist line” The study conducted by ADAM’s, has taken 300 subjects for interventional study, which again is distributed to 30 different nutritionists. Out of 300 subjects only 250 completed the study. The data did not provide details of the mix of population chosen with respect to, Man vis Woman, Diabetic-Non Diabetic and the initial pre-history of subjects etc. and was not adequate to conclusively prove the claimed benefits. The independent nutritionists reports were exactly identical raising concerns about their authenticity and did not tally with the actual number of volunteers that completed the study. The report was therefore was not considered to be acceptable. The claims “Improves Metobolic Health”, “Increases Good Cholesterol”, “Maintains sugar levels”, “Controls weight and waist line” were not substantiated. The advertisement contravened Chapter I.1 of the Code. This complaint was UPHELD Claim – “Helps in improving Digestion” The data provided is not substantiating this claim. The FARE LABS report just mentions that food cooked in Oilve Oil forms crust on the surface of food that blocks the penetration of oil making the food light. The advertiser asserts that this light food is easier to digest. The claim of “helps in improving digestion” was not substantiated and was considered to be misleading by ambiguity. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. This complaint was UPHELD Claims – “High MUFA content - 75%”, “Trans Fat free” “Zero cholesterol” were considered to be factual statements corresponding to the product. The chemical composition report of FARE Labs supports these claims. This complaint was NOT UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: Nutricia International Pvt. Ltd.
PRODUCT: Protinex Health Drink

COMPLAINT:

Advertisement Text as below: A survey shows that 80% Indians have a protein deficient diet. Protein deficiency causes fatigue and weakness and your regular diet is insufficient to meet your daily protein requirements. That is why you need Protinex, which has 50% extra proteins compared to ordinary health drinks that helps bridge the protein gap and keeps you active all day. Protinex, the protein expert! Audio clip, snapshot of Advt and link attached. This is a highly misleading, unethical and potentially hazardous advertisement creating a fear psychosis of protein deficiency with consumption of usual diets in 4/5 of population. There is a blatant attempt to entice and force lay people to consume Protinex (protein supplement) to bridge this protein gap with illusionary health claims (remain active all day and dont suffer from weakness or fatigue). The reasons for labelling this as a misleading, unethical and potentially hazardous advertisement are: 1. The survey with questionable methodology was conducted by the company itself (conflict of interest) and published in a non-indexed journal. It uses a poor method (24 hour recall), which cannot quantify accurate intakes, and estimates protein consumption from an outdated NIN reference (updated recently). The cut-off point used is RDA, which meets requirements of 95% population. With appropriate cut-offs to define deficiency (~5% population), the prevalence would be much lower. Further, findings from 30-55 years are extrapolated to entire population, including vulnerable segments like pregnant and lactating women, infants and children. 2. Health claims are made without necessary regulatory approvals (FSSAI or DCGI) or randomized controlled trials. With such health claims, ideally the product should be categorised as a drug to be prescribed by medical practitioners. 3. Scientific evidence indicates that unregulated consumption of protein supplements,as propagated by the advertisement, will prove hazardous for subjects with overt or occult chronic kidney disease, which is assuming epidemic proportions in India. Further, unnecessary supplementation can also cause renal damage in vulnerable infants and children, and result in fetal loss and growth retarded babies in pregnant women. Action is requested to immediately initiate steps to withdraw the advertisement and censure the company

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The advertiser representatives were given personal hearing by ASCI. As claim support data, the advertiser has provided a research study that they conducted via IMRB. The claim support data was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC viewed the TVC, heard the Radio spot, and considered the Advertiser’s response as well as opinion of the Technical expert presented at the meeting. The CCC noted that the survey methodology was 24 hour recall method. This survey methodology was not considered to be a robust method, unlike a diary method, as it could give inaccurate results for quantification of the actual intake of protein rich food. Presenting the survey results as “80% of Indian diets are protein deficient” based on a limited survey was therefore considered to be inadequately substantiated and misleading by exaggeration. The survey did not cover incidence of protein deficiency. The CCC concluded that the presentation of the advertisement was likely to mislead by implying that protein deficient diet as determined by the 24 hour recall survey would result in Protein deficiency, when that was not the case. The claim, “And your regular diet isn’t sufficient to meet your daily protein requirement”, was considered to be misleading by implication, as it implies that Protinex is a replacement for regular diet. The TVC and the Radio advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

COMPANY: Lenovo India Pvt.Ltd
PRODUCT: Motorola G 3rd Gen

COMPLAINT:

Motorola India claims its Moto G3 mobile to be of IPX7 standard but which is actually not .Please take stringent action against this false advertisement.

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: NOT UPHELD

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 opinion of the Technical expert presented at the meeting. Advertiser provided test report by an independent lab in support of the claim that “Moto G 3rd gen is water resistance”. The CCC concluded that the claim, “Moto G3 mobile is of IPX7 standard”, was substantiated. The complaint was NOT UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: Hike Ltd
PRODUCT: Hike Messenger

COMPLAINT:

“5 times faster and 10 new features”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

 

 

COMPANY: Hike Ltd
PRODUCT: Hike Messenger

COMPLAINT:

1st complaint- In the advertisement, the so called messenger promoting its hike direct service. 1. This service is nothing but a modified Bluetooth service, in where both having hike messenger in their phone can share files, videos, movies etc.... why this hypocrisy? 2. But the main offensive of this advertisement is that it provoking misbehaviour and filthy approach to study. They should find another sensible situation to fit their purpose. But please do not let them to make the environment of the classroom as filthy as a club room. 2nd complaint- It shows a class room scene where a teacher is seriously teaching Calculus. The BACKBENCHERS are playing on mobiles, downloading movies, making sounds on the mobile. Teacher is shown as inefficient and unable to handle the class. Students should not be shown as going to college to have fun, down load movies, play on mobiles inside the classroom when the class is being taught. This tantamounts to demeaning the Institution of Class rooms, Class room learning and the Teachers, who are architects of the future citizen. 3rd complaint- The Hike advertisement shoes college boys sharing video files while lecture is going on in class. Promoting use of phone and the app in class even without a net connection, disregard, disrespect for teacher and lesion taught. This is a bad idea and the advertiser is encouraging young boys to involve in any activity other than studies. The youth is already losing interest in education and is further being misled by encouraging and showing newer ways to be away from books. 4th complaint- The advt by Hike Messenger service being telecast on tv these days where a bunch of backbenchers use hike in the class is a bad ad, it does not convey a good message. The content is bad as if promoting back- benchers hooliganism. It is sad when such things are shown, as young students having vulnerable minds easily get concepts like doing such behaviour in class is a hero’s behaviour. In a country like ours where parents squeeze themselves to send their kids to obtain good education in schools and colleges by paying through their noses, and if instead of paying attention to the lecture’s/ teacher’s teachings, if students indulge in such irresponsible acts it is sad and detrimental to the future of students, such rotten ads should be scrapped.

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. However, in the absence of response from the advertiser, an exparte decision was taken. On receiving ASCI’s communication of request for confirmation of compliance, the advertiser informed ASCI that they did not receive ASCI’s earlier communication. The advertiser was once again granted an opportunity to respond to the complaint along with the dates for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the TVC and considered the Advertiser’s response for Review. The advertiser argues that the advertisement was merely intended to be a light-hearted advertisement without intending to denigrate the teachers or the teaching profession/ community in any manner. The advertiser also cited an example of a "bad teacher" depicted in popular fiction "Harry Potter" Series of children fiction. The CCC acknowledged that the overall advertisement is humorous. However the CCC concluded that the scene shown in the TVC of students playing a prank and as a result “a bursting sound in the class room while the teacher is teaching”, shows a dangerous practice and this depiction could be avoided. The TVC contravened Chapter III.3 of the ASCI Code.The decision of complaint being Upheld stands on Review.

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

COMPLAINT:

“100% Ayurvedic” “Quick Acting” “Get charged for the intense pleasure” “Herbal Drink for Men & Women.”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing. Advertiser sought additional time to respond to the complaint which was granted to them. The claim support data was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response as well as opinion of the Technical expert presented at the meeting. The advertiser argues that the product is an oral liquid supplement for men as well as women. It is purely herbal product which helps enhance and improve enthusiasm and happiness. Also, the advertisement has no reference any which way implied or otherwise that it is an Aphrodisiac. However, the CCC observed that the statements in the advertisement such as, “to be taken 30 minutes before”, “quick acting”, “Get charged for the intense pleasure” and reference to the use of “Also use Stay-On Spray for better results” clearly suggests that the product is meant for sexual performance. Based on this assessment, the CCC concluded that the advertisement is in Breach of the law as it violated The Drugs & Magic Remedies Act. The CCC noted that the claims “Quick Acting” “Get charged for the intense pleasure” were not substantiated for this proprietary product. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and III.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: HealthCare Global Enterprises Limited
PRODUCT: HCG Hospital- CyberKnife

COMPLAINT:

“In Cyberknife Surgery There’s No Knife. No Actual Surgery And, By The End Of It. No Cancer”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing and submitted their written response. The advertiser’s response was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC viewed the Website/Internet advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response as well as the opinion of Technical expert presented at the meeting. The CCC noted that the advertisement mentions “no cancer” at the end of treatment, implying cure from cancer and also a small number of cases have been presented as claim support data. The CCC concluded that the claims, “In Cyberknife Surgery …..And, By The End Of It. No Cancer” were not substantiated. Also, specific to the claim implying cure for cancer, the advertisement is in Breach of the law as it violated The Drugs & Magic Remedies Act. The website advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and III.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: Truweight Wellness Pvt.Ltd.,
PRODUCT: Truweight Loss Program

COMPLAINT:

“See Results in 10* Days! Or your money back*!” “India’s first honest weight loss program where you lose weight through superfoods, not weight loss pills, gadgets, surgery or false promises.”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. The advertiser argues that they do not promise any guaranteed weight loss in 10 days. They only say “See Results in 10 days”. Result could mean increased energy, better feeling, less body pain and some weight loss. 10 days is like a trial period, in which if clients do not see any benefit, they can opt out of the program and ask for refund. For the claim, See Results in 10* Days! Or your money back*!”, the Advertiser has submitted a before and after photograph and refund invoice of only one customer. The CCC did not consider the data provided of one customer as an adequate substantiation for the claim. The claim of weight reduction using only one customer data while reaching out to consumers at large, was considered to be misleading by implication and exaggeration.” No data was submitted for the claim “India’s first honest weight loss program where you lose weight through superfoods, not weight loss pills, gadgets, surgery or false promises.” The CCC concluded that claims “See Results in 10* Days! Or your money back*!”, “India’s first honest weight loss program where you lose weight through superfoods, not weight loss pills, gadgets, surgery or false promises.” were not substantiated and were misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Chapters 1.1 and 1.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: Triumphant Institute of Management Education P. Ltd
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

Print Advertisement Claims T.I.M.E does it again! 10 T.I.M.E. Students Get 100 percentile in CAT ‘15 Join T.I.M.E, the proven Leader in CAT Training Website Claim 11 T.I.M.E students get 100 percentile in CAT ‘15 Complaint No.1 The Advertisement is given by T.I.M.E. Classes an institute which provides training for CAT which mentions that the institute is, claiming T.I.M.E. does it again 10 T.I.M.E. Students get 100 percentile in CAT 15 Join T.I.M.E. -the proven Leader in CAT Training 1. In the said advertisement T.I.M.E. claims that T.I.M.E. does it again What does T.I.M.E. want to convey students by the statement T.I.M.E. does it again? What did T.I.M.E. do remarkable before? It is a vague statement to attract students. 2. T.I.M.E. has stated in the advertisement 10 T.I.M.E. Students get 100 percentile in CAT 15 with photographs of 10 students - Does T.I.M.E have any proof to prove that these are T.I.M.E. students? - Are these photographs and numbers authentic? On what basis are these numbers stated? -Does T.I.M.E. have any proof to prove that these students have obtained 100 percentile? And how did T.I.M.E. contribute in scoring 100 percentile? Since T.I.M.E. is claiming numbers and Results it has to be certified specifically. This information is also not available on the public domain. Either such numbers should be substantiated or available publicly. It seems that the said statement is baseless, unsubstantiated, overstated and misguiding students and readers. 3. T.I.M.E. has stated in the advertisement Join T.I.M.E. -the proven Leader in CAT Training -what does Proven Leader mean? Does 100 percentile score of mere 10 students in CAT 2015 make T.I.M.E. the Proven Leader in CAT training? Do they have any comparative statistics of competitors to prove that they are Proven Leader This statement is highly misleading and is intended to misdirect the Students/aspirants. By making such a statement, the Institutes intention appears to allure students by exaggerated claim. Advertisements for such educational programs should be truthful which will enable students to take right decision. And from the website of TIME institute where TIME is using same claims i.e. "11 TIME Students get 100 percentile in CAT'15" Complaint No.2 CAT 2015 Results Claiming to have proven record in CAT preparation Audit of 10 100%ilers in CAT 2015

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: NOT UPHELD

The CCC viewed the print and the website advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. As claim support data, for the claims “10 T.I.M.E. Students Get 100 percentile in CAT ‘15”, the advertiser has submitted a CA Certificate validating the results, enrollment forms of all students, screen shots of the CAT 2015 score cards of 11 students showing that they got 100 percentile in CAT 2015. For the claim, “T.I.M.E. is the proven leader in CAT training!”, the advertiser states that this claim is made based on the four criteria i.e. getting the best results in CAT year-after-year, maximum no. of students trained year-after-year, the largest network spread in India, and huge popularity among students in India and submitted a comparison chart giving the credentials. In the absence of any data contradicting the submissions of the advertiser by the complainant, the CCC considered the data to be acceptable. In the context of the advertisement, the CCC did not find the claim “T.I.M.E. does it again!” objectionable. The complaint was NOT UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: DLM Academy
PRODUCT: P T Education

COMPLAINT:

No. 1 in results

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The Advertiser (PT Education, Bhilwara) was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. The advertiser argues that the advertisement complained against has not been released by them. In parallel, ASCI also approached PT Education, Indore (parent organization) who confirmed that the advertisement was released without approval by PT Education, Indore representatives and states that they have no connection with PT Education Bhilwara Centre and the concerned person has submitted an apology letter. The CCC did not accept the advertiser’s (PT Education Bhilwara Centre) response denying any responsibility and concluded that the claim “No. 1 in results” was not substantiated. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapter I.1 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: Motorola India
PRODUCT: Motorola Drop Test Video Moto X Force Vs Galaxy Note 5

COMPLAINT:

On 20th January, 2016, Motorola India has posted a “Drop Test Video” disparaging one of the premium products of Samsung India – the Galaxy Note 5 model hand-held phone. The advertisement defies logic, lacks communication and disparages Samsung Galaxy Note 5 smartphone model. Motorola India has rolled out such disparaging, unethical, false, misleading and deceptive advertisements with the sole intention to mislead the consumers and breaching the Advertising Standards & Guidelines of ASCI as well as the laws of India. The video can be seen on various social media platforms as given below. The links are as under - 1. Twitter-20th Jan: Moto X Force vs Samsung Galaxy Note 5 (1 post) (5:39 PM) 2. Facebook –20th Jan: Mo to X Force vs Samsung Galaxy Note 5 (1 post) (4:55 PM) 3. YouTube:20th Jan: Moto X Force vs Samsung Galaxy Note 5 (1 video)https://twitter.com/MotorolaIndia/status/689781878249754624 The subject advertisement is creating lots of confusion and anger in the minds of the loyal Samsung customers.

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: NOT UPHELD

The CCC viewed the Twitter, Facebook and YouTube advertisements and considered the Advertiser’s response as well as the opinion of Technical expert presented at the meeting. The CCC acknowledged that the video appears to be a depiction of product demo and cannot be termed technically wrong. The advertiser has provided the details of the drop test which was reviewed by the technical expert of the ASCI and the comparative claims made in the advertisement were substantiated. The CCC noted the complaint details and the complainant’s objection to the product comparison demo. However, in absence of any technical data to dispute the drop test demo in the advertisement, advertiser’s claim were considered acceptable. The complaint was NOT UPHELD.

COMPANY: Motorola India
PRODUCT: Motorola-Drop Test Video-Moto X Force Vs Galaxy S)

COMPLAINT:

On 20th January, 2016, Motorola India has posted a “Drop Test Video” disparaging one of the premium products of Samsung India – the Galaxy S6 model hand-held phone. The advertisement defies logic, lacks communication and disparages Samsung Galaxy S6 smartphone model. Motorola India has rolled out such disparaging, unethical, false, misleading and deceptive advertisements with the sole intention to mislead the consumers and breaching the Advertising Standards & Guidelines of ASCI as well as the laws of India. The video can be seen on various social media platforms as given below. The links are as under – 1. Twitter – 20th Jan: Moto X Force vs Samsung Galaxy S6 (1 post) (12:20 PM) 2. Facebook –20th Jan: Moto X Force vs Samsung Galaxy S6 (1 post) (12:08 PM) 3. Youtube –19th Jan: Moto X Force vs Samsung S6 (1 video)&https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BDRGaGvFekI The subject advertisement is creating lots of confusion and anger in the minds of the loyal Samsung customers.

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: NOT UPHELD

The CCC viewed the Twitter, Facebook and YouTube advertisements and considered the Advertiser’s response as well as the opinion of Technical expert presented at the meeting. The CCC acknowledged that the video appears to be a depiction of product demo and cannot be termed technically wrong. The advertiser has provided the details of the drop test which was reviewed by the technical expert of the ASCI and the comparative claims made in the advertisement were substantiated. The CCC noted the complaint details and the complainant’s objection to the product comparison demo. However, in absence of any technical data to dispute the drop test demo depicted in the advertisement, the advertiser’s claim were considered acceptable. The complaint was NOT UPHELD.

COMPANY: Bharti Airtel Ltd
PRODUCT: Airtel 4G

COMPLAINT:

“71, 21,302 minutes of free wynk music, movies and games” “Wynk music alone claims 1.8 million songs in play store”. “How did they quantify time on games?”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek this a personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the TVC and considered the Advertiser’s response. The CCC noted from the response that the offer “71,21,302 minutes of free wynk music, movies and games” is available to any customer who buys an Airtel pack and is qualified with appropriate disclaimer. The CCC also considered the response submitted for the claims “Wynk music alone claims 1.8 million songs in play store” and did not find the same as objectionable. The complaint was NOT UPHELD. However, the CCC observed that the language and the hold duration of the super in the advertisement was not as per the ASCI guidelines on super. The TVC contravened the ASCI Guidelines on Supers. This complaint was UPHELD.

COMPANY: ANI Technologies Pvt. Ltd
PRODUCT: OLA Cabs

COMPLAINT:

"Ride an OLA for just Rs.8/km"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

ersonal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. The CCC concluded that the claim, “Ride an OLA for just Rs.8/km", was not substantiated and was also misleading by ambiguity. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: Erudite
PRODUCT: CAT Coaching

COMPLAINT:

Erudite has claimed 1) By far the Highest number of IIM Calls in Kolkata are from Erudite 2) No. 1 for CAT 3) Best results and personalised attention

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. However, no response was received from the advertiser. The CCC viewed the print advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims, “By far the Highest number of IIM Calls in Kolkata are from Erudite”, “No. 1 for CAT”, “Best results and personalised attention” were not substantiated. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapter I.1 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: Vodafone India Ltd
PRODUCT: Vodafone 4G Network

COMPLAINT:

“World’s Largest 4G Network, now in Kochi”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant and offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing. No response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date. The CCC viewed the advertisement hoarding. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that, the claim, “World’s Largest 4G Network, now in Kochi” was not substantiated. Also, the claim was misleading in the absence of appropriate disclaimer/qualifier. The advertisement hoarding advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and 1.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: Johnson & Johnson Ltd.
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“Johnson & Johnson-Making clinically proven mild products for more than 100 years!” Complaint J&J banner ad claims that is has been making products that are clinically proven mild for over 100 years!It’s a blanket statement to make. Seems to imply “all” products made by Johnson & Johnson. Also, manufacturing clinically proven mild products for 100 years need to be proven/ substantiated.

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The CCC viewed the website advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. The advertiser has thanked ASCI for bringing this issue to their attention. In the absence of specific comments from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim “Johnson & Johnson-Making clinically proven mild products for more than 100 years!” was not substantiated. The website advertisement contravened Chapter 1.1 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: IMS Learning Resources Pvt. Ltd
PRODUCT: CAT exam series

COMPLAINT:

1) IMS offers the most comprehensive study material designed by our 100 percentilers and our best faculty for CAT and other B-school entrance tests 2) SimCAT is by far the most comprehensive and most popular simulated CAT exam series in the country.

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the website/internet advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. The advertiser argues that they have always been quick and proactive in adopting all the amendments/changes notified time to time in the pattern of CAT or other B-school tests into its existing courseware/study material, in order to facilitate coverage of all the aspects to the students.The Study material also exhaustively covers all these three sections of CAT as well as pattern of other B-school entrance tests.They have a dedicated team spreadheaded and guided by their internal CAT Content Committee, for designing and structuring the course ware. As claim support data, the advertiser submitted the certificate from the IMS Management appointing their employees as Internal CAT Committee, score cards of three Internal CAT Committee members and score cards of six students. However, the CCC noted that the claims being made in the advertisement are superlative and the advertiser has not provided any comparative data to substantiate how they are better than the rest. The CCC concluded that claims “IMS offers the most comprehensive study material designed by our 100 percentilers and our best faculty for CAT and other B-school entrance tests”“SimCAT is by far the most comprehensive and most popular simulated CAT exam series in the country.” were not substantiated and were misleading by gross exaggeration. The website/internet advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and 1.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: Idea Cellular Ltd
PRODUCT: Idea 3G

COMPLAINT:

In one hoarding of Idea which I saw at Sarita Vihar Bus stand. The pillion was not wearing helmet and also doing stunt. Please address to it.Pillion not wearing helmet and doing stunt.

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: NOT UPHELD

The CCC viewed the advertisement hoarding and considered the Advertiser’s response. The CCC noted that the pillion rider is shown wearing a helmet with outstretched arms. In the context of the visual in the advertisement, the CCC did not consider the advertisement hoarding to be objectionable. The complaint was NOT UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: Mission Health
PRODUCT: Non-surgical spine care technologies

COMPLAINT:

Neck pain, back pain, slipped disc, sciatica?” “No medicine, no injections, no surgery” “Indias 1st super speciality spine clinic in Ahmedabad” Worlds most advanced non-surgical spine care technologies” “12,000+ patients treated successfully”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. However, no response was received from the advertiser. The CCC viewed the print advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims, “Neck pain, back pain, slipped disc, sciatica?” “No medicine, no injections, no surgery” “India’s 1st super speciality spine clinic in Ahmedabad”, “Worlds most advanced non-surgical spine care technologies” “12,000+ patients treated successfully” were not substantiated. The advertisement contravened Chapter I.1 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: Hewlett Packard India Sales Pvt. Ltd
PRODUCT: Hewlett Packard printer

COMPLAINT:

HP Printer will print upto 480 black and white pages with single ink black and white cartridge which cost 475 rupees and cartridge code is 678”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The advertiser representatives were given personal hearing by ASCI. As claim support data for Review, the Advertiser has submitted the ISO Test Report for Deskjet IA3545 using HP Cartridge 678 and the packaging of printer and cartridge which mention that the yields indicated are as per ISO standards and that actual yield may vary based on content printed and other factors. Advertiser states that the printer came with a full ink cartridge and not a demo cartridge and hence there was no requirement for a disclaimer to be provided. The claim support data for Review was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC viewed the TVC and considered the Advertiser’s response as well as opinion of the Technical expert presented at the meeting. According to the complainant he was able to print much less number of pages compared to the stated number in the advertisement and he experienced this issue twice for the first cartridge that was used in installation as well as for a repeat purchase. As claim support data, Advertiser has submitted a detailed description of the testing process (HPISO 247 11 Ink Yield Test Report). The advertiser has submitted a report to substantiate the claim regarding the yield of the cartridge and has arrived at an average value of 480 for the black cartridge. The advertiser further qualifies the claim as (actual yield may vary based on content printed and other factors). Based on this data, the CCC concluded that the claim of “Upto 480 pages” was substantiated. This complaint is Not Upheld on Review. However, the CCC noted that the TVC shows all the print-outs in bright colors whereas the claim of ”Upto 480 pages” is with reference to ISO test page yield for a black cartridge under standard test conditions. The coloured print outs are not representative of the standard page yield corresponding to the number of 480. The CCC concluded that, regardless of the disclaimer, the visuals of coloured print outs appearing along with the headline ”Upto 480 pages for just Rs. 475/- per cartridge” is misleading by ambiguity and implication. The TVC contravened Chapter I.4 of the ASCI Code. This decision of complaint being Upheld stands on Review.

COMPANY: Marico Ltd
PRODUCT: Livon Hairgain Tonic

COMPLAINT:

“It controls Hairfall in 90 days”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The advertiser representatives were given personal hearing by ASCI. As claim support data for Review, the Advertiser submitted additional details of the study conducted – (1) Study on 36 Female Volunteers (2) Study on 32 Male Volunteers with Androgenetic Alopecia. The claim support data was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC viewed the website advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response for Review as well as opinion of the Technical expert presented at the meeting. The study conducted on male volunteers showed photographs taken on Day0, 45 and 90. The photographs were graded on a scale given by expert dermatologists. The photo grading scores were analyzed by Wilcoxon signed rank test. The subjects enrolled in the study have been enrolled based on their hair fall status. The inclusion criteria indicates men suffering from androgenic alopecia with grade 2, 3, 4 However, The photographs were graded as 'zero' on Day 0. There is no statistical difference between 0 and 45 days (in spite of assuming day 0 scores as 'zero') as well as no difference between 45 and 90 days. The statistical difference is significant between zero and 90 days, perhaps due to assumption of day 0 scores as zero, which is actually not so as per the grade at baseline. If this score of zero is considered as a baseline (as done in this particular analysis) against which the treatment results have been compared then the product is exhibiting “moderate” improvement in androgenic alopecia. Based on the above opinion, the CCC concluded that the claim, “It controls Hairfall in 90 days”, was not substantiated adequately as the product was at most helpful in moderately improving the condition. The website advertisement contravened Chapter I.1 of the Code. The decision of complaint being Upheld stands on Review.

 

COMPANY: Reckitt Benckiser (India) Pvt. Ltd
PRODUCT: Mortein Liquid Vaporiser

COMPLAINT:

Packaging claim - “60 nights” Leaflet claim – “Liquid Vaporiser bottle will last up to 45 nights for 8 hours usage per night”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: NOT UPHELD

or Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. The claim support data was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC viewed the packaging and the leaflet insert provided by the Complainant and considered the Advertiser’s response as well as opinion of the Technical expert presented at the meeting. Advertiser argues that contents of the controlled sample of the Batch Number SPV /010 July 2015 suggest that there is no discrepancy between label and leaflet with regards to claim of 60 nights as established by a copy of the pack and Leaflets of the controlled samples of the same Batch number SPV /010 July 2015. Advertiser further argues that the complainant may have mixed the leaflets of Mortein Liquid Vapouriser (60 nights) with another variant of Mortein liquid Vapouriser (45 nights). The CCC relied on the advertiser’s control sample data. This complaint was NOT UPHELD. The advertiser has given data showing evaporation of the product liquid at a rate of >0.05 gms/hr even at the end of 60 days 8hr exposure with ~0.08 gm/hr rate at the start. Advertiser has submitted a summary document mentioning the TFT analysis during emanation that indicates TFT concentration remaining same at Day 60. Based on this data, the CCC noted that the advertiser has substantiated the claim of the product lasting for 60 nights. This complaint was NOT UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: VistaMind Education Pvt. Ltd
PRODUCT: Best Trainers for CAT, Bank PO

COMPLAINT:

“The Best trainers for CAT, Bank PO now in Hyderabad”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The advertiser was granted an extension of five days to the standard lead time of five days to submit their reply in response to their request for extension. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser argues that they have not made any comparison with other institutes nor are they claiming that their program is better than others. The CCC concluded that the claim in the Ad, “The Best trainers for CAT, Bank PO now in Hyderabad”, is an absolute claim and was not substantiated with comparative data versus other institutes to show that their trainers are better than anyone else. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapter I.1 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: Hindustan Unilever Ltd
PRODUCT: Lifebuoy Total 10 Soap

COMPLAINT:

“100% better germ protection”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: NOT UPHELD

Advertiser states that the claim of “100% Better Germ Protection” is indeed a comparative claim and is clearly made against soap bars without actives as per a laboratory test. This claim carries a disclaimer, "*As per lab tests on indicator organism as compared to soap bar without actives". As claim support data, the advertiser has provided a third party test reports. The reference to Consumer Voice Test report pertains to grades as per BIS classification and is not relevant to the performance of the product. The claim support data submitted by the advertiser was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC viewed the product packaging provided by the complainant and the advertiser, and considered the Advertiser’s response as well as the opinion of Technical expert presented at the meeting. The CCC concluded that the claim, “100% Better Germ Protection”, was substantiated. The complaint regarding claim of “10X better”, is not valid as the packaging does not contain this claim. The complaint was NOT UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: Hindustan Unilever Ltd
PRODUCT: Lifebuoy Clini-Care 10 Soap

COMPLAINT:

10 X better germ protection” “10 X more skin care” “10 X more skin care moisturizers”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

Complainant provided a photograph of the wrapper of Lifebuoy clini-care 10 soap (mfg date August 2015). This pack claims, “10 X better germ protection”, “10 X more skin care”. Advertiser provided sample of the product pack (mfg date September 2015). This pack claims, “10 X better germ protection”, “10 X more skin care moisturizers”. Advertiser argues that the current pack claim of 10x better germ protection is made against soap without actives, as per a laboratory test which establishes the superiority of Lifebuoy Clini-care 10 in comparison to a soap without actives. The claim support data was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC viewed the product packaging provided by the complainant and the advertiser and considered the Advertiser’s response as well as the opinion of Technical expert presented at the meeting. The advertiser claims that the packaging recently changed shows the claim of "10X better germ protection*" on the front of the pack, with a disclaimer on a side panel saying "*vs soap without actives and added moisturizers" and "*as per lab tests on an indicator organism". Advertiser provided third party test reports to substantiate the claim of 10X germ protection. The reference to Consumer Voice Test report pertains to grades as per BIS classification and is not relevant to the performance of the product. The claim of “10X more skin care” does not appear in the current pack. This complaint was NOT UPHELD. The advertiser did not provide any test report to substantiate the claim, "10X more skin care moisturizers", nor this objection was addressed in the advertiser’s response. These claims were not substantiated and contravened Chapter I.1 of the Code. This complaint was UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: Pest Control (India) Pvt Ltd
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“Removing the hives and solving your problem without killing the bees” “The service is completely eco-friendly and our technicians ensure that the bees are not killed during the removal”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: NOT UPHELD

The advertiser representatives were given personal hearing by ASCI. Advertiser stated that this particular incident was an aberration. At the customer’s house, a fogging machine was used to try and generate smoke, but inadvertently delivered residue of insecticide. This was not as per protocol, but had been allowed by oversight by PCI representatives. Advertiser provided technical data in support of the claims and submitted several customer testimonials. The CCC viewed the website advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. The CCC concluded that the issue was an unintentional lapse in the fulfillment of an advertised claim and may not invalidate the advertisement in terms of the ASCI code. The claims, “Removing the hives and solving your problem without killing the bees”, and “The service is completely eco-friendly and our technicians ensure that the bees are not killed during the removal”, were substantiated. The complaint was NOT UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: ANI Technologies Pvt. Ltd
PRODUCT: OLA Cabs

COMPLAINT:

"Ola! Now pay lesser for your cab ride. Travel in Delhi- NCR starting at just Rs. 25. Open the app & use code NCR25. TCA"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. However, no response was received from the advertiser despite a reminder. The CCC viewed the SMS – promotion mailer. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim in the Ad, "Ola! Now pay lesser for your cab ride. Travel in Delhi- NCR starting at just Rs.25. Open the app & use code NCR25. TCA", was false, not substantiated. Also, the CCC was of the view that the term `TCA’ in the SMS is misleading by ambiguity .The SMS – promotional mailer contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: Jaquar and Company Ltd
PRODUCT: Jaguar Lighting

COMPLAINT:

1. Eco-friendly mercury free 2. Energy efficient, more than 80 percent saving 3. Lasts upto 30 years

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. The claim support data was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. Advertiser argues that they have not claimed to be the only mercury free LED and have provided calculations for claims of “80% more saving” and “lasts up to 30 years”. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response as well as the opinion of Technical expert presented at the meeting. The CCC noted that all LED lamps and several other types of lamps are mercury free. The claim, "eco friendly mercury free" was therefore, considered to be misleading by omission of reference to other products that are not mercury free. The claim, “Energy efficient, more than 80 percent saving”, was not substantiated with results from independent test agency. Also, this claim is misleading by omission of mention of comparison to CFL and tubelights. Advertiser without any justification states that the life of the lamp as 27,000 hours and states that at 2.5 hrs/day it would last 30 years. But it does not give a test report to validate this claim of 27,000 hrs, nor does it state if this life is at one continuous run or in intermittent use; especially when it is well known that some devices have a much short intermittent life. The claim, “lasts upto 30 years”, was not substantiated. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: Accurate Group of Institutions
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

1. "100% Placement" 2. "100% Final Placements with multiple job offers" 3. “Placement @ Accurate showing Salary Package.”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. However, no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date. The CCC viewed the Ad – promotional material. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims, "100% Placement", "100% Final Placements with multiple job offers", and “Placement @ Accurate showing Salary Package”, were not substantiated. The Ad – promotional material contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapter I.1 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: G.L. Bajaj Institute of Management and Research
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“The Highest Salary Offered: 17.0 LPA.” “The Highest Salary Achieved: 10.42 LPA.” “Average Salary : 4.5 LPA.” “International Package Rs.17 LPA.”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. However, no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date. The CCC viewed the Ad – promotional material. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims, “The Highest Salary Offered: 17.0 LPA.”, “The Highest Salary Achieved: 10.42 LPA.”, “Average Salary : 4.5 LPA.”, and “International Package Rs.17 LPA.”, were not substantiated. The Ad – promotional material contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapter I.1 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: Fortune Institute of International Business
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"100% Quality Placements

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The advertiser sought a personal meeting with the ASCI Secretariat via telecon with their team and the ASCI Secretariat. The CCC viewed the Ad – promotional material and considered the Advertiser’s response. The CCC concluded that the claim, "100% Quality Placements", was not substantiated. The Ad – promotional material contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapter I.1 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: Ansal University
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“100% Placements for MBA - Applied Finance & MBA Real Estate & Infrastructure Management.”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. However, no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date. The CCC viewed the Ad – promotional material. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “100% Placements for MBA - Applied Finance & MBA Real Estate & Infrastructure Management”, was not substantiated. The Ad – promotional material contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapter I.1 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: Centre for Management Development
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"100% Placement Record"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. However, no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date. The CCC viewed the Ad – promotional material. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, "100% Placement Record", was not substantiated. The Ad – promotional material contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapter I.1 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: Deen Dayal Upadhyaya Institute of Management & Higher Studies
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“First Placement Lab in India for 100% Placement

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. However, no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date. The CCC viewed the Ad – promotional material. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “First Placement Lab in India for 100% Placement”, was not substantiated. The Ad – promotional material contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapter I.1 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: Asian Business School
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“Highest Package offered 15 Lac/p.a” “Average Package offered 5.8 Lac/p.a”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the Ad – promotional material and considered the Advertiser’s response. As claim support data, the advertiser provided “ABS-15LPA-CTC” & “ABS-Recruiter” towards the proof of 15 LPA CTC offered by one of their regular recruiter Trident Group and details of top recruiters offered placement opportunities towards average CTC offers. The claim, “Highest Package offered 15 Lac/p.a”, was an “offer” subject to certain terms and conditions. The CCC concluded that the claim was substantiated. This complaint was NOT UPHELD. The advertiser submitted only a list “ABS-Recruiters.pdf” as support data for the claim of average CTC offered. There was no evidence to prove that the individual students were indeed given the offer . The CCC concluded that the claim, “Average Package offered 5.8 Lac/p.a”, was not substantiated. The Ad – promotional material contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapter I.1 of the ASCI Code. This complaint was UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: Asia-Pacific Institute Of Management
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"100% Quality Placements

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The advertiser was granted an extension of five days to the standard lead time of five days to submit their reply in response to their request for extension of two weeks. However, the Advertiser’s response was received prior to the due date. The advertiser representatives were given personal hearing by ASCI. The CCC viewed the Ad- promotional mailer and considered the Advertiser’s response. The advertiser argues that their claim is regarding “quality” of placement and not “100% placement”. However the CCC did not agree with this interpretation as it is very likely to mislead consumers. The CCC concluded that the claim, "100% Quality Placements", was misleading by ambiguity. The Ad – promotional material contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapter I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: Chandigarh University
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“The highest salary package offered is 17 Lacs”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. However, no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date. The CCC viewed the Ad – promotional material. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “The highest salary package offered is 17 Lacs”, was not substantiated. The Ad – promotional material contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapter I.1 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: Dewan V.S. Group Of Institutions
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"100% Excellent Placement Record". "Management Placements 150%"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. However, no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date. The CCC viewed the Ad – promotional material. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims, "100% Excellent Placement Record", and "Management Placements 150%", were not substantiated. The Ad – promotional material contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapter I.1 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: Ishan Institute of Management & Technology
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

100% Placement record”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. However, no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date. The CCC viewed the Ad – promotional material. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “100% Placement record”, was not substantiated. The Ad – promotional material contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapter I.1 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: Balaji Motion Pictures Limited
PRODUCT: Kya Kool Hai Hum 3

COMPLAINT:

Promos of the movies “Kya Kool Hai Hum-3” are very adult one and the movie itself got "A" certificate then. how can Promos of these movies shown on Television? It is not good for our Children. Kindly Stop the Promos of these movies urgently.

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: NOT UPHELD

The CCC viewed the movie promos provided by the advertiser and considered their response. Advertiser argues that all the promotional videos of the Film for promoting the Film on television has been granted with a “V/UA” certificate by CBFC. Advertiser further provided copies of censor certificates issued by CBFC. The complaint was NOT UPHELD.

COMPANY: MRF Ltd
PRODUCT: MRF ZSLK Tyres

COMPLAINT:

1. When you drive on MRF ZSLK, Delhi Breaths a Little easier. 2. MRF ZSLK India’s Eco-Friendly Car tyre

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the Ad – signboard and considered the Advertiser’s response. The CCC concluded that the claims, “When you drive on MRF ZSLK, Delhi Breaths a Little easier”, and “MRF ZSLK India’s Eco-Friendly Car tyre”, were not substantiated with supporting data to prove that the MRF ZSLK Tyres results in vehicle consuming significantly less fuel and as a result emit lower emission. The CCC considered the claims to be misleading by exaggeration. The Ad - signboard contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: Endeavor Careers
PRODUCT: CAT 2016 Preparation

COMPLAINT:

“India's No.1 Coaching”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The CCC viewed the website advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. The CCC concluded that the claim, “India’s No.1 Coaching”, was not substantiated with comparative data versus other similar institutes. The website advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapter I.1 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: Godfrey Phillips India Ltd
PRODUCT: Pan Vilas Pan Masala

COMPLAINT:

ASCI Code does not permit the use of celebrities (e.g. In the field of cinema, sports and music) in ads of products which by law require health warning on its pack or cannot be purchased or used by minors. These advertisements can influence minors and encourage unsafe practices" Link for Ad : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=geHQytuNpxU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J6LAN-gTaFY

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: NOT UPHELD

The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the TVC and considered the Advertiser’s response. The Advertiser stated that the endorsement by the celebrity shown is not for "Pan Masala" but for "Pan Vilas Silver Dewz" which is Sweet Flavoured Cardamom Seeds. The CCC concluded that the TVC is not in contravention of the Chapter III (2) (e) of the ASCI Code. The complaint was NOT UPHELD.

COMPANY: Paras Surti Products Private Limited
PRODUCT: Paras Pan Masala

COMPLAINT:

"ASCI Code does not permit the use of celebrities (e.g. In the field of cinema, sports and music) in ads of products which by law require health warning on its pack or cannot be purchased or used by minors. These advertisements can influence minors and encourage unsafe practices"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The advertiser was granted an extension of two days to the standard lead time of five days to submit their reply. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the TVC and considered the Advertiser’s response. The Advertiser argues that the product has mandatory declarations in their advertising. The CCC noted that the TVC features Arbaaz Khan - a celebrity from the field of cinema for a product which has a health warning that it is injurious to health and cannot be purchased or used by minors. The CCC concluded that minors are very likely to be exposed to the TVC. The celebrity in the advertisement would have a significant influence on minors who are likely to emulate the celebrity in using the product. Also, the supers/statutory warning in the Hindi TVC were not in the same language as the audio of the TVC, and were not clearly legible. The TVC contravened Chapter III.2 (e) of the ASCI Code and ASCI’s Guidelines for Supers. The complaint was UPHELD.

COMPANY: Dharampal Satyapal Ltd
PRODUCT: Rajnigandha Pan Masala

COMPLAINT:

Pan Masala ads like Rajnigandha are showing the celebrities or models promoting the pan masalas in the very glamorous and fascinating way. Pan Masala ads like Rajnigandha should completely be banned from the television as these ads are affecting the youth in negative ways. I don't believe that just showing the warning at the end of the ad is helping in any way. Also, warning being shown very small letters at the below corner which many don't see. Pan masalas are definitely harmful for health but they are also harmful for clean India i.e. Swacch Bharat. Those who chew these products, peak anywhere and make places dirty. Also, they spread diseases which are communicable as they peak in the public places. Pan masala doesn't only affect the person who chew but others also in many ways. Lot of growing kids are picking up habits of chewing pan masalas by seeing celebrities and models promoting these products in very fascinating way. I strongly recommend that we ban these ads and promote "HEALTHY AND CLEAN INDIA".

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: NOT UPHELD

The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the TVC and considered the Advertiser’s response. The advertiser argues that their advertisements conform to applicable regulations and Rajnigandha Pan Masala and Rajnigandha Silver Pearls are food products and advertised with utmost care to ensure protection of legitimate interests of consumers. The CCC noted that the model shown in the TVC did not appear to be from the field of sports, music, or cinema. The CCC concluded that the TVC is not in contravention of the Chapter III.2 (e) of the ASCI Code. The complaint was NOT UPHELD.

COMPANY: K P Group
PRODUCT: Kamla Pasand Pan Masala

COMPLAINT:

Pan Masala ads like Kamla Pasand Pan Masala are showing the celebrities or models promoting the pan masalas in the very glamorous and fascinating way. Pan Masala ads like Kamla Pasand Pan Masala should completely be banned from the television as these ads are affecting the youth in negative ways. I don't believe that just showing the warning at the end of the ad is helping in any way. Also, warning being shown very small letters at the below corner which many don't see. Pan Masalas are definitely harmful for health but they are also harmful for clean India i.e. Swacch Bharat. Those who chew these products, peak anywhere and make places dirty. Also, they spread diseases which are communicable as they peak in the public places. Pan Masala doesn't only affect the person who chew but others also in many ways. Lot of growing kids are picking up habits of chewing pan masalas by seeing celebrities and models promoting these products in very fascinating way. I strongly recommend that we ban these ads and promote "HEALTHY AND CLEAN INDIA".

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: NOT UPHELD

The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. However, no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date. The CCC viewed the TVC and concluded that the model shown in the TVC did not appear to be from the field of sports, music, or cinema. The TVC is not in contravention of Chapter III.2 (e) of the ASCI Code. The complaint was NOT UPHELD.

COMPANY: Pan Parag India Ltd.
PRODUCT: Pan Parag Pan Masala

COMPLAINT:

Pan Masala ad showing the celebrities or models promoting the pan masala in the very glamorous and fascinating way. Pan Masala ad should completely be banned from the television as these ad affecting the youth in negative ways. I don't believe that just showing the warning at the end of the ad is helping in any way. Also, warning being shown very small letters at the below corner which many don't see. Pan Masalas are definitely harmful for health but they are also harmful for clean India i.e. Swacch Bharat. Those who chew these products, peak anywhere and make places dirty. Also, they spread diseases which are communicable as they peak in the public places. Pan masala doesn't only affect the person who chew but others also in many ways. Lot of growing kids are picking up habits of chewing pan masalas by seeing celebrities and models promoting these products in very fascinating way. I strongly recommend that we ban these ads and promote "HEALTHY AND CLEAN INDIA".

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the TVC and considered the Advertiser’s response. The Advertiser argues that the product has statutary warnings as per the rules and regulations. The CCC noted that the TVC features Sachin Khedekar - a celebrity from the field of cinema for a product which has a health warning that it is injurious to health and cannot be purchased or used by minors. The CCC concluded that minors are very likely to be exposed to the TVC. The celebrity in the advertisement would have a significant influence on minors who are likely to emulate the celebrity in using the product. Also, the supers/statutory warning in the Hindi TVC were not in the same language as the audio of the TVC. The TVC contravened Chapter III.2 (e) of the Code and ASCI’s Guidelines for Supers. The complaint was UPHELD.

COMPANY: Dharampal Satyapal Ltd
PRODUCT: Rajnigandha Silver Pearls

COMPLAINT:

“The print advertisement and TVC features popular Bollywood actress Priyanka Chopra (scanned copy attached). She is shown holding a packet of Rajnigandha Silver Pearls. The product is described as saffron blended flavoured cardamom seeds. The advt goes on to say: Taste elaichi like never before. A dazzling experience of saffron blended, silver coated cardamom seeds, sure to leave your taste buds impressed. Also, Acchchai ki ek alag chamak hoti hai.” First, this is a clear case of surrogate advertising. DS Group which manufactures Rajnigandha Silver Pearls also manufactures the hugely popular product - Rajnigandha Pan Masala. In fact, the name Rajnigandha would make a consumer think immediately of pan masala. Secondly, it is shocking that a celebrity like Priyanka Chopra is promoting and endorsing a brand closely linked to pan masala, a product known to be harmful to health. Promoting the brand Rajnigandha would tempt the youth of this country to consume a hazardous product like pan masala and lead to an unhealthy nation. Priyanka Chopra must be aware about the rising cases of oral cancer. As a celebrity, she has a moral responsibility not to lead todays youth in the wrong direction. We would like to ask her if she or her family/friends consume Rajnigandha Silver Pearls. If so, how much? Action to be taken: We propose immediate withdrawal of the advt. As such, as per recent news reports ASCI is investigating pan masala advts where celebrities have endorsed the product.”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: NOT UPHELD

The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the magazine advertisement and the TVC, and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser stated that the pack and visual shots used in the advertisement of the brand clearly and conspicuously indicate that the product being advertised is flavored cardamom seeds (Elaichi) and is different product as compared to Rajnigandha Pan Masala. The CCC concluded that the magazine advertisement and TVC is not in contravention of the ASCI Code. The complaint was NOT UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: Triumphant Institute of Management Education Pvt. Ltd
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“T.I.M.E. the national leader in entrance exam training” Complaint no.1 TIME is claiming on the website (http://time4education.com/gmat/) that it is "National Leader in Entrance Examination Training" My Complaint is that the statement "National Leader in Entrance Exam Training" is completely misleading and deceptive. "Nation Leader" word is very subjective. I am not sure weather they are talking about: 1) The number of exams they prepare for 2) The number of students they teach 3) The number of students selected through them in these exams. This is completely misleading with a clear intent of fooling customers by submitting wrong claims and poor communication. This statement is completely Indefensible and hence TIME should submit a validation of this statement. Complaint no.2 The Advertisement says that TIME is the National leader in entrance exams training how can TIME claim to be the national leader in entrance exam training ?is there any data/report to substantiate this Complaint no.3 Online ad campaign for GMAT coaching http://www.time4education.com/gmat/images/GMATLanding-page.gif in the advertisement, it is claimed that TIME is "National Leader in Entrance Exam Training". this is a statement if opinion and is not verifiable. Such a claim cannot be made.

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: NOT UPHELD

The CCC viewed the website advertisements and considered the Advertiser’s response for Review. As claim support data, the advertiser submitted a CA certificate, comparison chart versus other similar institutes with respect to - a) the number of courses/training offered, b) the network in India, c) the no. of students trained annually, d) popularity among aspirants/students, and e) consistently securing good results. In the absence of any data contradicting the submissions of the advertiser by the complainant, the CCC accepted the adveriser’s submission. The CCC concluded that the claim. “T.I.M.E., national leader in entrance exams training” was substantiated. The decision on complaints were Not Upheld on Review.

 

COMPANY: I.T.C Limited
PRODUCT: Sunfeast Farmlite Cookies

COMPLAINT:

Two ladies are playing on zebra crossing like they are in their garden cars are waiting to go. Children can copy it and accident can accure on zebra crossing U should walk fast and should reach to other side so vehicles can move fast this two ladies wasting time of others.

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The advertiser representatives were given personal hearing by ASCI. The CCC viewed the TVC and considered the Advertiser’s response for Review. The advertiser argues that the TVC does not violate any of the advertising guidelines, and the actions depicted in the TVC do not portray any illegal activities. The advertiser cited examples of various similar television commercials and situations portrayed in films. The CCC reviewed the advertisements submitted by the advertiser and noted that ASCI has not received any complaints against the commercials referred to by the advertiser and as such, these advertisements are not necessarily a precedence for the current complaint subject. The advertiser may choose to lodge a complaint against those advertisements but showing these examples does not make the advertiser’s advertisement “right”. The CCC did not agree the examples of scenes depicted in movies can be considered acceptable and ASCI’s remit does not cover content of films. The CCC considered the depiction of pedestrians lingering at zebra crossing instead of focusing on crossing the road to be inappropriate. The CCC concluded that the visual of “two ladies (mother and daughter) playing on zebra crossing”, shows and encourages without justifiable reason, an unsafe practice, and manifests a disregard for safety. The TVC contravened Chapter III.3 of the Code. The decision of complaint being UPHELD stands on Review.

COMPANY: Hathway Cable & Datacom Pvt. Ltd.
PRODUCT: Hathway Broadband Internet

COMPLAINT:

“10 times faster internet” and “50mbps” speed.

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The advertiser representatives were given personal hearing by ASCI. The CCC viewed the Ad - pamphlets/website /You Tube advertisements/TVC and considered the Advertiser’s response for Review. For the claim, “50 Mbps speed”, the Advertiser informs that there was a one off technical issue at the complainant’s premises and the same was resolved. The advertiser provided evidence of complaint resolution. The advertiser also submitted supporting data to substantiate their claim of “50 Mbps speed”. The CCC concluded that the advertiser’s claim was substantiated. This complaint was NOT UPHELD. For the claim, “10 Times Faster”, the Advertiser argues that majority of the broadband service providers are providing on an average 5 Mbps speed to the subscribers whereas the advertiser is able to provide 10 times faster speed of 50 Mbps based on their latest DOCIS 3.0 technology. As claim support data, the advertiser submitted a comparison chart of various tariff plans issued by different Internet service providers The CCC concluded that while the claim, “10 TIMES FASTER” was substantiated, it was misleading by omission of an appropriate disclaimer. The Ad – pamphlets/website/youtube Ad/ TVC contravened Chapter I.4 of the Code. The decision of this complaint being Upheld stands on Review.

COMPANY: Shree Maruti Herbal
PRODUCT: Stay On Power Capsule

COMPLAINT:

“Its proper intake gradually revived my vigour, vitality, energy & helped my confident game with match winning performances.” “Viva Stay-On Capsules for longer, stronger & bigger performance.”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing. The advertiser sought additional time to respond to the complaint which was granted to them. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. The advertiser argues that the concerned licensing authorities have certified Stay-On as power capsules based on it’s constituents vis-a-vis reference material. The benefits being claimed are attributed to the presence of ingredients having inherent properties. The presence of Ginseng provides an added advantage to the consumer. As per the advertiser, the advertisement is not promoting it as an Aphrodisiac. The CCC noted that the advertised product is a patent and proprietary ayurvedic medicine as per the licence copy. However, the CCC concluded that the claims, “Its proper intake gradually revived my vigour, vitality, energy & helped my confident game with match winning performances”, “Viva Stay-On …. for longer, stronger & bigger performance”, were not substantiated with evidence of effectiveness and were misleading by exaggeration. Also, the claim,“… for longer, stronger & bigger performance”, read in conjunction with pack visual of a man and woman, with a qualifier that the product is only for men - “Herbal Supplement for men”, implies that the product is meant for enhancement of sexual pleasure which is in Breach of the law as it violated The Drugs & Magic Remedies Act. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1, I.4 and III.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: Future Value Products Pvt. Ltd
PRODUCT: Dr. Back Orthopedic Mattress

COMPLAINT:

The advertisement claim that “Since 1982, Pyare Lal Group is the only manufacturer in the world, who manufactures all types of mattresses under one roof.”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date. The CCC viewed the print advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim in the advertisement, “Since 1982, Pyare Lal Group is the only manufacturer in the world, who manufactures all types of mattresses under one roof”, was not substantiated and was misleading by gross exaggeration. The print advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: LegalEdge Tutorials
PRODUCT: LegaEdge – All India Rank 1

COMPLAINT:

“All India Rank 1, 8, 13, 42, 56, 71, 75 and many more in CLAT 2015”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. The advertiser argues that the ranks are a combined results of two institutes: Mentors United and Legal Edge and the claim “ranks 1, 8, 13, 42, 56, 71, 75” were on the basis of information about enrolments available in public domain and that Mentors United institute merged with Legal Edge. However the CCC noted that the advertiser did not submit any authentic document to support the same. As per additional document submitted by the Advertiser, Mentors United brand was “discontinued” in June 2015 and some faculty members joined Legal Edge. The CCC concluded that the claim, “All India Rank 1, 8, 13, 42, 56, 71, 75 and many more in CLAT 2015”, was not substantiated and is misleading by ambiguity. The print advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: International Management Centre
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"100% Placements in Top MNC's"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. The CCC concluded that the claim in the Advertisement, "100% Placements in Top MNC’s", was not adequately substantiated as evidence such as the batch size, enrolment forms, appointment letters and contact details of the students who got placements were not provided for verification and is misleading in the absence of any disclaimer/qualifier. 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: IMS Ghaziabad
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"200% Placement of PGDM (2013-15)"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing or telecon with the ASCI Secretariat. Accordingly, a telecon was organized with the ASCI Secretariat. The CCC viewed the advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. The CCC concluded that the claim in the advertisement, "200% Placement of PGDM (201315)", was not adequately substantiated as evidence such as the batch size, enrolment forms, appointment letters and contact details of the students who got placements were not provided for verification and is misleading in the absence of any disclaimer / qualifier. 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: IILM Institute of Business and Management
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“The Average annual salary package offered touched near to about 7.5 lakhs”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing and submitted their written response. The advertiser argues that the statement “The average annual salary package offered touched near to about 7.5 lakh” is backed by data, but did not submit this for the scrutiny of the CCC citing that the data is confidential. The CCC viewed the advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. The CCC concluded that the claim in the Advertisement, “The Average annual salary package offered touched near to about 7.5 lakhs”, was not substantiated with evidence such as the batch size, enrolment forms, appointment letters and contact details of the students who got placements and is misleading in the absence of any disclaimer / qualifier. 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: Institute of Technology and Science Ghaziabad
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“100% Placement”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim in the advertisement, “100% Placement”, was not substantiated. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapter I.1 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: Jaipuria School of Business
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

1. “Highest package of Batch 13-15 is Rs.6.00 lakhs & average Rs. 4.5 lakhs” 2. “100% Placement”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. The CCC concluded that the claims in the Advertisement, “Highest package of Batch 13-15 is Rs.6.00 lakhs & average Rs. 4.5 lakhs”, and “100% Placement”, were not adequately substantiated with evidence such as the batch size, enrolment forms, appointment letters and contact details of the students who got placements for verification, and were misleading in the absence of any disclaimer/qualifier. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters 1.1 and 1.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: ITM Business School
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

1. “Top International Placement: '10,50,000” 2. “Top Domestic Placement: ' 8,50,000” 3. “Average CTC: '5,00,000”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims in the advertisement, “Top International Placement: '10,50,000”, “Top Domestic Placement: 8,50,000”, “Average CTC: “5,00,000”, were not substantiated. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapter I.1 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: K.R. Mangalam University
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“100% Placement Record

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim in the advertisement, “100% Placement Record”, was not substantiated. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapter I.1 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: JK Business School
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“An average salary of Rs. 4 lakhs (Domestic) and Rs. 13 Lakhs (International)”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

d the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim in the advertisement, “An average salary of Rs. 4 lakhs (Domestic) and Rs. 13 Lakhs (International)”, was not substantiated. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapter I.1 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: Jagannath International Management School
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

Highest Salary is Rs.14.75 lac p.a. & Average Salary is Rs.5.5 lac p.a”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. The CCC concluded that the claim in the advertisement, “Highest Salary is Rs.14.75 lac p.a. & Average Salary is Rs.5.5 lac p.a”, was not adequately substantiated. Also, the claims is misleading by ambiguity as the salary package mentioned in the advertisement is in Indian Rupee whereas the employment referred to an overseas offer. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and 1.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: Reliance Communications
PRODUCT: Reliance Upgrade to 3G

COMPLAINT:

“Enjoy seamless voice and data connectivity on India’s finest & technologically advanced 3G network.”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. The advertiser argues that by partnering with Ericsson - a global leader in 3G, they have implemented signaling related features of 3GPP-R7 to provide longer battery life, and majority of Node B is connected with fast superlative MEN back haul to ensure best and most consistent throughput as compared to other 3G networks. However, no data was provided as to how the Reliance 3G is finer than the rest of the 3G networks. The CCC concluded that while “technologically advanced” adjective was acceptable, the claim, “India’s finest 3G network”, was not adequately substantiated and is misleading by exaggeration. The print advertisement contravened Chapters 1.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: Jindal Global Business School
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“100% Placement with leading corporations”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim in the advertisement, “100% Placement with leading corporations”, was not substantiated. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapter I.1 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: Techno Institute of Management Sciences
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“Minimum 3 Jobs for Every Student”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. The CCC concluded that the claim in the Advertisement, “Minimum 3 Jobs for every student” nor the claim the advertiser intended to make (i.e. “Minimum 3 Job offers for every student” was not substantiated and is misleading by ambiguity. 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: Parul Institute of Management
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“Highest salary package 6.0 Lacs, Average salary Package 3.25 Lacs”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim in the advertisement, “Highest salary package 6.0 Lacs, Average salary Package 3.25 Lacs”, was not substantiated and is misleading by ambiguity in absence of any disclaimers / qualifiers . 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: Pune Institute of Business Management
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

1. 14 Lakhs PA Highest Package* 2. 6 Lakhs PA Average Package*

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims in the advertisement, “14 Lakhs PA Highest Package”, “6 Lakhs PA Average Package”, were not substantiated. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapter I.1 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: Suryadatta College of Hospitality Management & Travel Tourism (SCHMTT)
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“100% Placements Since inception in 5/7 Star Hotels in India & Abroad”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The Advocate responded on behalf of the Advertiser. The Advocate confirmed that the advertisement was sent due to oversight. The CCC viewed the advertisement and considered the Advocate’s response. The CCC concluded that the claim in the Advertisement, “100% Placements Since inception in 5/7 Star Hotels in India & Abroad”, was not substantiated and is misleading. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. The CCC noted the Advocate’s response that the Advertiser has taken corrective measures to modify the advertisement.

 

COMPANY: Sri Chandrasekharendra Saraswathi Viswa Mahavidyalaya (SCSVMV University)
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“100% Placement”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim in the advertisement, “100% Placement”, was not substantiated. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapter I.1 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: Thiagarajar School of Management
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

1) Average Salary: 5.3 Lakh p.a 2) Highest Salary : 7.50Lakh p.a 3) Average no of offers/Students : 1.3

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims in the advertisement, “Average Salary: 5.3 Lakh p.a.”, “Highest Salary:7.50 Lakh p.a.”, “Average no. of offers/Students :1.3”, were not substantiated. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapter I.1 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: Bengal College of Engineering and Technology
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“100% Placement”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim in the advertisement, “100% Placement”, was not substantiated. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapter I.1 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: Srusti Academy of Management
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

2014-15 - Highest Salary Rs.3.16 Lacs, Median Salary Rs.2.20 Lacs” 2) “2013-14 - Highest Salary Rs.3.14 Lacs, Median Salary Rs.1.88 Lacs”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims in the advertisement, “2014-15 - Highest Salary Rs.3.16 Lacs, Median Salary Rs.2.20 Lacs”, “2013-14 - Highest Salary Rs.3.14 Lacs, Median Salary Rs.1.88 Lacs”, were not substantiated. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapter I.1 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: Alard Institute of Management Sciences
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“100% Placement Record”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim in the advertisement, “100% Placement Record”, was not substantiated. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapter I.1 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: Al-Barkaat Institute of Management Studies
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“100% Placement in reputed companies at highly attractive packages”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim in the advertisement, “100% Placement in reputed companies at highly attractive packages”, was not substantiated. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapter I.1 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: Disha Institute of Management and Technology
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“100% Placements”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing and submitted their written response. The advertiser was requested to provide additional data in support of their claim as their initial response was not exhaustive and complete. However, the advertiser informed ASCI that due to the non-disclosure policy of the Institute pertaining to sharing of information of the students to third party they are unable to furnish any further details. The CCC concluded that the claim in the advertisement, “100% Placements”, was not adequately substantiated as evidence such as the batch size, enrolment forms, appointment letters and contact details of the students who got placements were not provided for verification. The advertisement was considered misleading by ambiguity in absence any disclaimers / qualifier. 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: Master School of Management
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

1) Highest Package-10.5 Lac P.A. 2) Average Package-6.3 Lac P.A. Placement Trend 2013-15: 3) Students Placed- 98.33% 4) Students Opted for Entrepreneurship - 1.67%

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims in the advertisement, “Highest Package-10.5 Lac P.A.”, “Average Package-6.3 Lac P.A.” and Placement Trend 2013-15 – “Students Placed- 98.33%”, “Students Opted for Entrepreneurship - 1.67%”, were not substantiated. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapter I.1 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: Dr. Gaur Hari Singhania Institute of Management & Research (GHS-IMR)
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“Institute is not only known for its actual 100% placement but also for quality education”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim in the advertisement, “Institute is not only known for its actual 100% placement but also for quality education”, was not substantiated. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapter I.1 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: International School of Management Patna
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“100% Placement and internship assistance” Complaint This claim needs to be substantiated with necessary support data. DECISION – Exparte The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim in the advertisement, “100% Placement and internship assistance”, was not substantiated. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapter I.1 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

This claim needs to be substantiated with necessary support data.

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim in the advertisement, “100% Placement and internship assistance”, was not substantiated. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapter I.1 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: Institute of Management & Information Science
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“100% Placement in CRP-2015 with Average Salary Rs.4.27 Lakh”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. The CCC concluded that the claim in the Advertisement, “100% Placement in CRP-2015 with Average Salary Rs.4.27 Lakh” was not adequately substantiated as evidence such as the batch size, enrolment forms, appointment letters and contact details of the students who got placements were not provided for verification, and is misleading by ambiguity in absence of any disclaimer / qualifier. 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: Institute of Engineering & Management Group
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“100% Placement since inception”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim in the advertisement, “FIEM has placed 100% of their students since inception”, was not substantiated. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapter I.1 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: Hi-Tech Institute of Technology
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“100% Placement since inception”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

This claim needs to be substantiated with necessary support data.

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim in the advertisement, “100% Placement since inception”, was not substantiated. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapter I.1 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: Heritage Business School
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

1. 100% Placement is assured to all students. 2. The average salary is higher than the ALL India B-School average.

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

These claims need to be substantiated with necessary support data.

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims in the advertisement, “100% Placement is assured to all students”, “The average salary is higher than the ALL India B-School average”, were not substantiated. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapter I.1 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: Future Institute of Engineering and Management
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“FIEM has placed 100% of their students since inception”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim in the advertisement, “FIEM has placed 100% of their students since inception”, was not substantiated. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapter I.1 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: Kochi Business School Mar Thoma School of Management Studies
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“100% Placement”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing and submitted their written response. The advertiser argues that they haven’t assured 100% placement but offered excellent placement support, with the belief of turning the venture a complete success. The CCC viewed the advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. The CCC noted that the claim of the advertiser reads as “Excellent placement support leading to 100% placement” and concluded that the claim was not substantiated and is misleading by ambiguity. 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: Vinr Communications Shantketan Entertainments (Ishq Junoon)
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

The visual is vulgar and indecent especially in depiction of a woman and not suitable to be viewed by minors”.

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The ASCI approached the Advertiser (VINR Communications) as per their contact details available in the public domain to seek their response in addressing the grievance of the complainant and was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing and submitted their written response. The advertiser argues that the production houses for this movie promo are Shantketan Entertainment and VINR Films and not VINR Communications. They further sought date and time to have discussion with ASCI Secretariat. However, the advertiser representatives did not attend the meeting on the meeting scheduled by ASCI. The CCC viewed the movie posters on various media such as You Tube, Facebook, and the homepage of VINR Group and considered the Advertiser’s response. The CCC noted that the movie promo is produced by Shantketan Entertainment in association with VINR Films. The homepage of VINR Group does provide the address of VINR Communication in their “Contact Us” page. The CCC did not accept the advertiser’s (VINR Communication) response denying any responsibility. The CCC concluded that the visual in the movie promo is vulgar, indecent and repulsive especially in depiction of a woman and not suitable to be viewed by minors. In the light of generally prevailing standards of decency and proprietary, the visual will cause grave and widespread offence to general public. The poster – movie promo (internet version) contravened Chapter II of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: KAFF Appliances (India) Pvt. Ltd. (KAFF)
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

1. “KAFF is now India’s Most Trusted Brand. Consumer Validated 2015” 2. “In a nationwide survey conducted by IBC Infomedia and consumersurvey.com, KAFF has been declared as the most trusted Brand of 2015 in the Kitchen Appliance category. This award by India’s Most Trusted Brand Awards Council just reaffirms what we always believed 3. “A fact validated by consumers” 4. “Think Green with KAFF”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser despite a reminder. The CCC viewed the magazine advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims, “KAFF is now India’s Most Trusted Brand. Consumer Validated 2015”, “In a nationwide survey conducted by IBC Infomedia and consumersurvey.com, KAFF has been declared as the most trusted Brand of 2015 in the Kitchen Appliance category. This award by India’s Most Trusted Brand Awards Council just reaffirms what we always believed”, “A fact validated by consumers”, “Think Green with KAFF”, were not substantiated. The magazine advertisement contravened Chapter I.1 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: Tata Motors Ltd.
PRODUCT: GENX Nano Easy Shift

COMPLAINT:

Show that these vehicles can reach ahead of any other vehicles on traffic signal while on red by zig zag driving to overtake standing vehicles. Such advertisements promote how to distort traffic rules by wrong way over taking & out of rules driving. Young generation follow the same on our road

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The advertiser representatives were given personal hearing by ASCI. The CCC viewed the TVC and considered the Advertiser’s response. The advertiser argues that in the said scene, there is no reference to any red lights and in a slow moving traffic situation, the driver sees an opening and vacant lane ahead of him and as a natural practice takes the car ahead, without cutting off any vehicle or by displaying any rash driving, by overtaking the car ahead of him. The CCC acknowledged that while the overall advertisement is acceptable, in one frame of the TVC, the vehicle indicator light is not lit while overtaking another vehicle. This visual is in violation of traffic rules and shows an unsafe practice. The TVC contravened the Guidelines on advertisement of automotive vehicles and Chapter III.3 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

 

 

Complaint to
WhatsApp
DID YOU KNOW?

Developed by Wishtree Technologies LLP