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

Select Month :

 
ASCI Recommendations June 2015
 

COMPANY: The Sagar School
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“International School Award 2014 – 2017”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response for Review. The award certificate copy submitted by the advertiser of December 2014 is for recognition for “Outstanding development of International Learning in the Curriculum” whereas the advertisement does not mention this fact. The claim of “International School Award 2014-2017”, is false, and is misleading by omission. Also, the advertisement does not fulfil the criteria laid down by the British Council for making such claims in the advertisement such as size of the logo, placement of the CONFIDENTIAL Page 2 of 16 logo etc. The Ad contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The decision of complaint being Upheld stands.

 

COMPANY: Green Valley High School
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

1. 17 Acre Lush Green Campus 2. 20 students per class.

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

The Statutory School Information and the affidavit given to CBSE on the website mentions 11.84 acres of campus. The display board mentions 20 students per class whereas the print and website says 25 students per class. The complainant is a parent of a girl child who is seeking admission for her daughter. During her survey they came across some misguiding facts about Green Valley High School. No. of students in each Class: The display board mentions 20 students per class whereas the print ad says they have 25 students per class but the Statutory School Information and the affidavit given to CBSE on their website http://greenvalley-highschool.edu.in/ mentions that they limit their class strength to 25.

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The CCC viewed the print and the display board advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims in the Ad, “17 Acre Lush Green Campus”, “20 students per class”, were not substantiated. The Ad contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapter I.1 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: Japanese Automatic Penis Increaser Tool
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

1) Make penis 8 to 9 inches long, thick & strong and increase sex time up to 30 -45 minutes by making it straight. Get 100 % rid from impotency, premature ejaculation, nil sperms, nightfall, and bad habits like masturbation with guarantee. Get 30 days medicine, 8GB memory card, fun gel and excitement capsule free. 2) Benefits Guaranteed 3) No Side Effect. In this advertisement it claimed that by the use of these machines size of the male penis will increase by 2- 6 inches and intercourse timing will increase by 30-45 minutes.

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The CCC viewed the print advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims in the Ad, “Make penis 8 to 9 inches long, thick & strong and increase sex time up to 30 -45 minutes by making it straight. Get 100 % rid from impotency, premature ejaculation, nil sperms, nightfall, and bad habits like masturbation with guarantee. Get 30 days medicine, 8GB memory card, fun gel and excitement capsule free”, “Benefits Guaranteed”, “No Side Effect”, “By the use of these machines size of the male penis will increase by 2- 6 inches and intercourse timing will increase by 30-45 minutes”, were not substantiated. Also, specific to the claims related to sexual impotency, and the Ad claims read in conjunction with the Ad visual implying that the product is meant for enhancement of sexual pleasure, the Ad is in Breach of the law as it violated The Drugs & Magic Remedies Act. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and III.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: Japanese Automatic Penis Increaser Tool
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

1) See the effects with its use. 2) If your penis is small, thin crooked then make it long, thick, strong and shapely and increase sex time by 30-40 minutes. Cure premature ejaculation, nightfall, impotency, childlessness, nil sperms 100% from its roots. Get 30 days medicine with Japani Masti Oil, Kaam Kala Book, DVD, rapturous spray, excitement capsule without any charge. Colour Mobile Free In this advertisement it claimed that by the use of these machines size of the male penis will increase by 2- 6 inches and intercourse timing will increase by 30-45 minutes. These type of exaggerated claims are made in the advertisement.

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The CCC viewed the print advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims in the Ad, “See the effects with its use”, “If your penis is small, thin crooked then make it long, thick, strong and shapely and increase sex time by 30-40 minutes. Cure premature ejaculation, nightfall, impotency, childlessness, nil sperms 100% from its roots. Get 30 days medicine with Japani Masti Oil, Kaam Kala Book, DVD, rapturous spray, excitement capsule without any charge. Colour Mobile Free”, “By the use of these machines size of the male penis will increase by 2- 6 inches and intercourse timing will increase by 30-45 minutes”, were not substantiated. Also, specific to the claims related to sexual impotency, and the Ad claims read in conjunction with the Ad visual implying that the product is meant for enhancement of sexual pleasure, the Ad is in Breach of the law as it violated The Drugs & Magic Remedies Act. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and III.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: Japanese Automatic Penis Increaser Tool
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

1) World’s No, 1 Sexologist. 2) Sexual Diseases, why disappointed? 3) Free Japanese Penis Increaser Tool 4) Makes penis long by 7 to 8 inches, thick, shapely and energetic. Cures premature ejaculation, impotency, childlessness and increase sex time up to 25-30 minutes. Get excitement capsule, romantic spray, 175 Kaam Kala Book, 16GB Memory Card and DVD Free along with 45 days medicine. 5) Money back if it does not work In this advertisement it claimed that by the use of these machines size of the male penis will increase by 2- 6 inches and intercourse timing will increase by 30-45 minutes. These type of exaggerated claims are made in the advertisement.

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The CCC viewed the print advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims in the Ad, “World’s No, 1 Sexologist”, “Sexual Diseases, why disappointed?”, “Free Japanese Penis Increaser Tool”, “Makes penis long by 7 to 8 inches, thick, shapely and energetic. Cures premature ejaculation, impotency, childlessness and increase sex time up to 25-30 minutes. Get excitement capsule, romantic spray, 175 Kaam Kala Book, 16GB Memory Card and DVD Free along with 45 days medicine”, “Money back if it does not work”, “By the use of these machines size of the male penis will increase by 2- 6 inches and intercourse timing will increase by 30-45 minutes”, were not substantiated. Also, specific to the claims related to sexual impotency, and the Ad claims read in conjunction with the Ad visual implying that the product is meant for enhancement of sexual pleasure, the Ad is in Breach of the law as it violated The Drugs & Magic Remedies Act. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and III.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: Sexual Disease
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

1) Small penis, why disappointed? 2) World’s No.1 Penis Increaser Tool 3) Effect starts immediately with its use. Make penis long by 7 to 8 inches, thick, strong, shapely and energetic. Increase sex time up to half an hour. Successful cure of impotency, premature ejaculation, nightfall, childlessness. Powerful 30 days medicine, excitement capsule, romantic spray, Kamasutra Book, 8 GB Memory Card free. 4) Money back if not benefits are not found. In this advertisement it claimed that by the use of these machines size of the male penis will increase by 2- 6 inches and intercourse timing will increase by 30-45 minutes. These type of exaggerated claims are made in the advertisement.

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The CCC viewed the print advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims in the Ad, “Small penis, why disappointed?”, “World’s No.1 Penis Increaser Tool”, “Effect starts immediately with its use. Make penis long by 7 to 8 inches, thick, strong, shapely and energetic. Increase sex time up to half an hour. Successful cure of impotency, premature ejaculation, nightfall, childlessness. Powerful 30 days medicine, excitement capsule, romantic spray, Kamasutra Book, 8 GB Memory Card free”, “Money back if not benefits are not found”, “By the use of these machines size of the male penis will increase by 2- 6 inches and intercourse timing will increase by 30-45 minutes”, were not substantiated. Also, specific to the claims related to sexual impotency, and the Ad claims read in conjunction with the Ad visual implying that the product is meant for enhancement of sexual pleasure, the Ad is in Breach of the law as it violated The Drugs & Magic Remedies Act. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and III.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: Sex Dhamaka
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

1) Small penis, why disappointed? 2) Japanese Penis Increaser Tool 3) Automatic Power Tool 4) Make penis long by 8-9 inches, thick, shapely, thick by 5 inches and sex time up to 40-45minutes. 5) Cure pre mature ejaculation, nightfall, nil sperms, and impotency and take double joy of sex. For more information 8GB memory card, color mobile, sex texts free In this advertisement it claimed that by the use of these machines size of the male penis will increase by 2- 6 inches and intercourse timing will increase by 30-45 minutes. These type of exaggerated claims are made in the advertisement.

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

the Ad, “Small penis, why disappointed?”, “Japanese Penis Increaser Tool”, “Automatic Power Tool”, “Make penis long by 8-9 inches, thick, shapely, thick by 5 inches and sex time up to 40-45minutes”, “Cure pre mature ejaculation, nightfall, nil sperms, and impotency and take double joy of sex. For more information 8GB memory card, color mobile, sex texts free”, “By the use of these machines size of the male penis will increase by 2- 6 inches and intercourse timing will increase by 30-45 minutes”, were not substantiated. Also, specific to the claims related to sexual impotency, and the Ad claims read in conjunction with the Ad visual implying that the product is meant for enhancement of sexual pleasure, the Ad is in Breach of the law as it violated The Drugs & Magic Remedies Act. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and III.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: Vacuum Therapy
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

1) Unique invention 2) Penis Increaser Tool with Vaccum Therapy 3) American Agency FDA believes that by Vaccum Therapy and Penis increaser Tool along with Ayurvedic medicines make your penis 8 to 9 inches long within 15 minutes, 3-4 inch thick, strong, straight and increase sex time by 30-45 minutes, also cures premature ejaculation, impotency, small penis, looseness of penis, thinness, nightfall, erectile dysfunction, childlessness, impotency from its roots. 4) 100% Herbal Treatment In this advertisement it claimed that by the use of these machines size of the male penis will increase by 2- 6 inches and intercourse timing will increase by 30-45 minutes. These type of exaggerated claims are made in the advertisement

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The CCC viewed the print advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims in the Ad, “Unique invention”, “Penis Increaser Tool with Vaccum Therapy”, “American Agency FDA believes that by Vaccum Therapy and Penis increaser Tool along with Ayurvedic medicines make your penis 8 to 9 inches long within 15 minutes, 3-4 inch thick, strong, straight and increase sex time by 30-45 minutes, also cures premature ejaculation, impotency, small penis, looseness of penis, thinness, nightfall, erectile dysfunction, childlessness, impotency from its roots”, “100% Herbal Treatment”, “By the use of these machines size of the male penis will increase by 2- 6 inches and intercourse timing will increase by 30-45 minutes”, were not substantiated. Also, specific to the claims related to sexual impotency, and the Ad claims read in conjunction with the Ad visual implying that the product is meant for enhancement of sexual pleasure, the Ad is in Breach of the law as it violated The Drugs & Magic Remedies Act. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and III.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: Sikander-e-Azam
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

1) World’s Best Sikandar-e-Azam 2) Capsule for Penis Enlargement available in India 3) New trust with one capsule 4) Make penis long by 1-2 inches, thick cures premature ejaculation and makes penis steely. Strength, contentedness, satisfaction – With Guarantee Card. These type of exaggerated claims are made in the advertisement.

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The CCC viewed the print advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims in the Ad, “World’s Best Sikandar-e-Azam”, “Capsule for Penis Enlargement available in India”, “New trust with one capsule”, “Make penis long by 1-2 inches, thick cures premature ejaculation and makes penis steely”, “Strength, contentedness, satisfaction – With Guarantee Card”, “By the use of these machines size of the male penis will increase by 2- 6 inches and intercourse timing will increase by 30-45 minutes”, were not substantiated. Also, specific to the claims implying that the product is meant for enhancement of sexual pleasure, the Ad is in Breach of the law as it violated The Drugs & Magic Remedies Act. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and III.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: The Body care Slimming & Beauty Clinic
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

1. 7 days fast track program. 2. Fastest reduction infrared cavitation therapy. 3. Lose up to 5 to 8 cms in one area. 4. Get rid of baldness. Result in 6 weeks only

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

The before and after pictures for both obesity and baldness are misleading. Obesity and baldness are disorders and there are no short cuts like ‘7 days fast track program’ and instant solutions to lose up to 5 to 8cms.

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims in the Ad, “7 days fast track program”, “Fastest reduction infrared cavitation therapy”, “Lose up to 5 to 8 cms in one area”, “Get rid of baldness result in 6 weeks only”, were not substantiated. The visuals showing the images of before and after the treatment were misleading. Specific to the claims implying baldness prevention (a condition referred in Schedule J of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act) is in Breach of the law as it violated The Drugs & Cosmetics Rule 106. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1, I.4 and III.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: Odisha Television Ltd.
PRODUCT: Tarang TV

COMPLAINT:

“Your No.1 Choice”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

There is no source attached supporting the above claim. Such advertisement by TARANG is misleading and intentional to confuse the viewers and as well as advertisers.

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The CCC viewed the print advertisement and the TVC and considered the Advertiser’s response. The CCC concluded that the source and date of research and criteria for assessment for the claim of “Your No.1 Choice”, was not mentioned in the TVC. The TVC contravened Chapter I.2 of the ASCI Code. This complaint was UPHELD. The source and date of research for the claim of “Your No.1 Choice”, was indicated in the print advertisement. This complaint was NOT UPHELD.

COMPANY: Byju’s Classes
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

1. Announcing excellent success ratio in our first IIT batch with 161 of 212 students clearing JEE Mains 2. Bangalore's Biggest Scholarship Test for 7th to 12th Class students and 3. Get Classes from India's Best teachers.

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

There is no evidence / support / validation given for all the above mentioned claims that Byju's classes advertisement makes and those claims may be misleading. The advertiser should be asked to substantiate their claims of "161 of 212 students clearing JEE Mains 2015", "Bangalore's Biggest Scholarship Test ", and "Classes from India's Best teachers" with necessary support and genuine comparative data of other institutes/competition where ever applicable. They should also provide third party validation data to substantiate their claims, if required

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. The CCC concluded that the claims, “Announcing excellent success ratio in our first IIT batch with 161 of 212 students clearing JEE Mains”, and “Get Classes from India's Best teachers”, were not substantiated with valid data. The claim, “Bangalore's Biggest Scholarship Test for 7th to 12th Class students”, was not substantiated with comparative data versus other institutes. The Ad contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapter I.1 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: Odisha Television Ltd.
PRODUCT: Tarang TV

COMPLAINT:

“54% of the GROSS RATING POINT of all Odia channels”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Odisha Television Limited in their website advertised through a pie chart by claiming 54% of the GROSS RATING POINT of all Odia channels. Here there is no discrimination in terms of genre and even no other channel name is pronounced for a better clarity, like comparing a bag of various vegetables with another without a clarification of what are the items available in the other one. Here the advertiser seems to hide the identity of better performing channel with a ill intention to misguide the viewers. This ad is quite ambiguous and from the viewers perspective is causing lot of confusion.

RECOMMENDATION: NOT UPHELD

The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. The CCC concluded that the Website claim of, “Redefining TV viewing in Odisha and beyond with a visual of pie chart with 54% figure for Odisha Television Network Channels” , is not misleading as it showed the total viewership of the advertiser’s channels against all other competitive channels taken together. The complaint was NOT UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: Kent Ltd
PRODUCT: Kent Mineral RO Water Purifier

COMPLAINT:

“KENT RO + UV is “Accepted by IMA” in TOI “Validated by IMA” in Hindustan Times”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

“I was looking to buy a water purifier and noticed the ad of KENT RO. However, I feel that the ads are misleading. Is KENT RO+ UV Accepted by IMA or Validated by IMA? Also the fine print in the advertisement reads The IMA has accepted that water purified through KENT RO+UV is purer than boiled water. What is accepted by IMA? Safe Water prevents waterborne diseases or water purified through KENT RO+UV is purer than boiled water?”

RECOMMENDATION: NOT UPHELD

The CCC viewed the print advertisements and considered the Advertiser’s response. The CCC concluded that the statements, “IMA has accepted that water purified through Kent RO+UV is purer than boiled water*”, “*as validated by IMA” were substantiated as per IMA letter. “Safe water prevents waterborne diseases*” “*As accepted by IMA” were considered as generic statements. The complaint was NOT UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: Raghudeep Eye Hospital
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

1. India’s first exclusive blade free Lasik Centre in Ahmedabad. 2. World’s safest blade free technology. 3. US-FDA approved single use disposables to prevent infections.

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. The CCC concluded that – Claim, “India’s first exclusive blade free Lasik Centre in Ahmedabad”, was not substantiated with supporting data. Claims, in particular the phrases underlined, “World’s safest blade free technology”, “US-FDA approved single use disposables to prevent infections”, were not substantiated with authentic evidence. The advertisement contravened Chapter I.1 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: Casa Grande
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

The main tagline "on time every time"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

“We are developing a multi storeyed residential township at Oragadam named "Temple Green". To promote this project, we have created advertisements with our brand ambassador actor Madhavan. The main tagline of the subject advertisement which was created in 2013 is "on time every time" implying that the project is progressing well as per schedule. Another real estate developer Casa Grande is found to be using our tag line "on time every time" to promote their project recently in 2015 without obtaining our consent. We also bring to your notice that we have spent huge amount of money in creating the advertisement and the tag line which is misused by the co-developer. This is in contravention to the business ethics and we strongly object to such misuse.”

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The CCC viewed the TVC of the Complainant and the TVC of the Advertiser. The CCC concluded that the sign off slogan, “On time every time", was very similar to the sign off slogan of the earlier run advertisement of another competitor advertiser in the same sector of business so as to suggest plagiarism. The TVC contravened Chapter IV.3 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: General Mills India P. Ltd
PRODUCT: Pillsbury

COMPLAINT:

9 out of 10 women say that products made by using Pillsbury Rava Indi Mix taste like home made rava idlis

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

This implies that their products are tasted and preferred by 9 out of 10 people in Delhi. That this advertisement is false and misleading and not based on any survey made in Delhi is apparent from the fact that as per the data released by an independent agency, Nielsen RMS, our share for similar products in Delhi is 79% (q4 2014). The advertisement also does not seem to have been backed by any survey made by them or any independent agency. If the advertisement were really true, then all other manufacturers of instant mixes put together should not have more than 10% of the market share in Delhi, which on the face of it is unbelievable. When as per an independent agency our products are preferred by 8 out of 10, it goes without saying that the market share of all other manufacturers of similar products including the General Mills India is less than 20%. When we look at the advertisement of Rava Idly mix of General Mills in the light of what is stated above, it is clear that it is not based on independent survey or tests conducted by anybody. Their purpose appears to be to mislead the general public into believing that they have almost monopoly over rava idli mix in Delhi area and the share of the other competitors is negligible.”

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The CCC heard the Radio spot provided by the Complainant which has a reference to Pillsbury’s Instant Rava Idli Mix. In the radio spot, the protagonist mentions cooking Rava Idli with the new Instant Rava Idli Mix. “Mile bilkul Mrs Iyer ke ghar jaisa swad.” “9 out of 10 women say that”. The CCC considered the Advertiser’s response which provided data of the study conducted on their Rava Dosa food product. The CCC concluded that the claim, “…Payein bilkul ghar jaisa swaad. Yeh hai desh ki 10 mein se 9 mahilaon ka kehna” for the Pillsbury Rava Indli Mix was not substantiated, and contravened Chapter I.1 of the Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: Pernod Ricard India P. Ltd
PRODUCT: Seagram

COMPLAINT:

Seagram, an alcohol brand is promoting responsible drinking. If ads on alcohol are prohibited, this also falls within its ambit.

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response for Review. The statement in the Ad, “More than a few drinks can change the meaning of U-turn”, read in conjunction with the logo of `Seagram’ and statement “Enjoy responsibly”, directly promotes a brand linked to alcohol. The CCC concluded that the advertisement contravened Chapter III.6 (b) of the ASCI Code (“Makes direct or indirect reference to the prohibited or restricted products.”). The decision of complaint being Upheld stands on Review.

 

COMPANY: KLU University
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“100% placement of registered & eligible B TECH & MBA students in 2014-15, 5 lakh+ salary”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Those 2 claims are not backed by any evidence. Also it is not mentioned that "past performance is no guarantee of future prospects”. It violates clause 3, 4(a) & 4(e) of guidelines for educational institutions.

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The CCC viewed the print advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim in the Ad, “100% placement of registered & eligible B TECH & MBA students in 2014-15, 5 lakh+ salary”, was not substantiated. The Ad contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapter I.1 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: Volkswagen Group Sales India P. Ltd(*)
PRODUCT: Volkswagen Das Auto

COMPLAINT:

The advertisement shows that the Volkswagen car can be brought with 0% interest for 3 years. RBI had banned 0% interest rate for all consumer goods on 17 September 2013 circular. So Volkswagen is violating RBI directive.

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: NOT UPHELD

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 the opinion of the Technical expert presented at the meeting. The CCC concluded that the RBI circular dated 17th Sep 2013 is addressed to "All Scheduled Commercial Banks (Excluding RRBs) / Local Area Banks" with subject line "Pernicious practices of select banks deterring customer protection and accounting integrity" does not call out NBFC (Non banking financial company). In view of this current status, the claim of “0% interest for 3 years” and such communication for Credit card was not false for the Non-Banking Financial Company. Also, the advertisement is not misleading as it carried disclaimers. The complaint was NOT UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: Idea Cellular Ltd
PRODUCT: Idea Internet Network

COMPLAINT:

There kids left their studies and make Harley Davidson bike out of rajdoot. My kids use to get diverted from their studies because of the ridiculous ideology of IIN ads. These ads are misguiding kids as they think that even if they fail, they will become successful from IIN.

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: NOT UPHELD

The CCC viewed the TVC depicting the protagonist repairing a bike and concluded that the TVC does not misguide children that even if they fail, they will become successful from IIN, and was not considered objectionable. The complaint was NOT UPHELD.

COMPANY: Idea Cellular Ltd
PRODUCT: Idea Internet Network

COMPLAINT:

The person in the ad is shown to have learnt playing sitar by joining IIN i.e. Idea Internet Network. Impliedly, it is projected as a University or an Institution where you can pursue any course whereas it does nothing close to it. The advertisement is absolutely misleading made with a malafide intention. The T.V commercial is misleading as it leads the viewer to believe that it is some kind of learning institution imparting different courses.

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: NOT UPHELD

The CCC viewed the TVC depicting the protagonist referring to music notes while playing sitar and concluded that the TVC does not project IIN as an University or a learning institution and was not considered to be objectionable . The complaint was NOT UPHELD.

COMPANY: Vodafone Essar Ltd.
PRODUCT: Vodafone

COMPLAINT:

The Vodafone ad claims about uninterrupted voice calls on 3G Network. Have they substantiated that all the Vodafone numbers having 3G connection has uninterrupted voice call at all places? In my case, my friends have Vodafone connection and are struggling to have uninterrupted voice calls on 3G. Also the disclaimer, if any, is so small in size that it can't be viewed even on a 42 inch TV screen, then what can you expect on a smaller screen. This is violation of ASCI's standards.

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The Advertiser was sent the complaint details and was requested to substantiate their claims. No response was received prior to the due date of the meeting. The CCC viewed the TVC. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim of “uninterrupted voice calls on 3G Network”, was not substantiated. The TVC contravened Chapter I.1 of the Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

COMPANY: Uber
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

Ad mentions “Your drink, we drive”. The ad is indirectly promoting drinking

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The CCC viewed the Website Ad and considered the Advertiser’s response. The line in the Ad, “You drink, we drive”, read in conjunction with the depiction of logos of Bars such as Zara etc. as #UBERAPPROVED PARTNERS shown in the Ad, promotes alcohol drinking. The CCC concluded that the Website advertisement contravened Chapters III.3, and III.5 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: JadeBlue
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

The advertisement shows a man riding a bike without helmet which is a punishable offence and promotes unsafe practices

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The CCC viewed the TVC and concluded that the visual of “a man riding a bike without a helmet” as shown in the TVC promotes an unsafe practice. The TVC contravened Chapter III.3 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

COMPANY: Rocket Capsules
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

The advertisement claims to enhance sexual power with either direct or veiled presentation. A daily newspaper is for viewing of all members of a family including kids. The subject advertisement has harmful contents for viewers of all and particularly for small children.

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The CCC viewed the print advertisement, referred to the product claims, and considered the Advertiser’s response. The CCC concluded that the claims in the Ad to enhance sexual power was not substantiated. Also, the Ad claims read in conjunction with the Ad visual and the pack visual 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 and III.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: Amity University
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"Amity University ranked among the Top Universities in Asia by QS, a leading ranking organization”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Amity University survives on huge money pumped into advertisement endorsement by celebrities like Dhoni who has nothing to do with higher education. On visiting the QS site, the statement “Amity University is ranked 251 among the Asian Universities” is misleading and cheating. This act amounts to misleading the perceptions of prospective students/parents 3. Can a "non-profit Private University" which the university claim have such huge investments on advertisements?

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The CCC viewed the print advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim in the Ad, "Amity University ranked among the Top Universities in Asia by QS, a leading ranking organization”, was not substantiated and is misleading by ambiguity. The Ad 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: Krishnapatnam Port Company Ltd
PRODUCT: Krishnapatnam Port KPCT

COMPLAINT:

An ad promoting KPCT shows a driver racing his sports car on public road recording lapping times and trying to beat past time records and then shows chasing a helicopter. Tagline: "If you love speed you will love Krishnapatnam port!" The ad inspires and glorifies racing on public roads (perhaps unintendedly) conveying an obnoxiously bad message. Featuring former Formula1 driver Narain Karthikeyan would inspire young blood to try similar acts endangering lives of many on roads.

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The CCC viewed the TVC and considered the Advertiser’s response. The CCC concluded that the TVC shows speed maneuverability in a manner which encourages unsafe or reckless driving. The ad also depicts stunts being performed in normal traffic conditions in some frames. Also, the duration of the supers in the TVC were not for minimum 6 seconds hold duration on the screen and not present for the scenes depicting stunts. The TVC contravened Chapter III.3 of the Code, Clause (b) and (C) of the ASCI Guidelines for Automotive Vehicles, and ASCI Guidelines for Supers. The complaint was UPHELD.

COMPANY: Rojgar Mahiti Kendra
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

Police constable Bharti Std 12 pass, age 18 to 27 years. Last date: 15-6-15 to fill up the online form. To get 100% success in police constable exam. Join our classes or will refund the fees, Rojgar mahiti Kendra. In the advertisement, the institute has mentioned recruitment in police department as constable, but I have verified from various sources, there is no such recruitment announced by the department. It’s completely misleading the students. Secondly institutes name is very much similar to a Government body namely Rojgar Talim Kendra which creates the impression as a Govt. entity. Thirdly the institute is assuring 100% success or will refund the fees. This advertisement is completely misleading the students and misguiding on the wrong path for their benefit.

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The CCC viewed the print advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim in the Ad, “100% success in police constable exam. Join our classes or will refund the fees”, was not substantiated. Also, the mention of recruitment in police department as a constable is false. The Ad contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapter I.1 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: HDFC Bank Ltd
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

This is to share with you my experience with the lack of transparency at HDFC Bank regarding their 5% cashback under the debit card cashback promo offer on minimum spend of INR 4000 from 1st August 2014 to 31st March 2015 at Snapdeal.com. I had made a transaction (order number: 3519936538) on 11th November 2014 at Snapdeal.com for Rs. 40990 vide netsafe debit card numbered 5248776517879462. In accordance with the published terms and conditions of the promo offer, the cashback of INR 500 (attached herewith) for the aforementioned transaction should have been processed and credited to my account. However, the cashback was not processed after the stipulated 75 days from the transaction date and upon enquiring, the banks customer support team responded that as the transaction was made using a netsafe card the cashback was not processed. Only the usage of the debit card directly at Snapdeal.com would have been eligible for the cashback offer. The offer terms & conditions enumerated on both the banks smartbuy site and on Snapdeal.com did not specifically exclude the usage of any netsafe card generated on a debit card from the eligibility criteria. It is pertinent to note that a netsafe card, a virtual card (that can be generated on either the physical debit and/or credit card account), can only be used for online transactions and is touted as offering all the benefits of using the debit card while eliminating most of the risks associated with using the physical card online. Therefore, the usage of the netsafe card for a transaction at a shopping site was logical in absence of any communication of the terms and conditions of cashback promo offer stating that usage of a netsafe card instead of the physical debit card number would void the promo offering by the bank. Also, the actual funds did get transferred from my account immediately on generation of the netsafe card, prior to the completion of the transaction at Snapdeal.com. Thus, I did not have any benefit of access to those funds to be denied the fulfilment of the cashback promo offer. Further enquiries as to any specific reference clearly stating the caveat of usage of net safe card generated on a debit card rendering the promo offer invalid were repeatedly ignored by the bank. Consequent to the complaint and escalating to Mr. Aditya Puri, the MD and Chairman of HDFC Bank, after one and a half month from raising the issue, as a service gesture and not towards fulfilment of the promo offer, the cashback of INR 500 was initiated by the bank. However, the escalation to Mr. Puri also did not elicit any response citing any reference/site revealing clarity on the terms and conditions communication barring usage of a netsafe card for availing the cashback promo offer. The net safe card did not find any mention in the few exclusions listed in the terms and conditions on the smart buy site of the bank. As mentioned in my multiple communications to HDFC Bank, the actual cashback of INR 500 was not material. My concern was the lack clarity and communication regarding the applicable terms and conditions to customers. As a customer, I understand that it is my responsibility to understand the terms and conditions and nuances of the fine print of any product and/or promo offering that I avail. However, I should not be expected to be aware of invisible fine print that is sprung when one asks the bank to honour its self-proclaimed commitment. I understand that any such promo offering by the bank is voluntary and the bank, operating within regulatory and statutory parameters, is free to frame the terms and conditions as it considers necessary. However, it is imperative to for any such terms and conditions and relevant stipulations be unambiguously communicated/published. For instance, as per this very cashback promo offer, the maximum cashback that was to be processed was INR 500 irrespective of the transaction amount (above INR 4000) despite the nomenclature of 5% cashback. Since, this was clearly communicated, there is no reason to demand cashback of actual 5% of transaction amount, INR 40990 in my case. Consequent to completion of the promo offer duration, the pages stating the terms and conditions are not available online now, hence I am attaching the web pages saved as of 31st March 2015 (the defunct URLs are printed on the top right corners) and the email correspondence with the bank for your reference. Request your inputs and intervention as you deem fit.

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: NOT UPHELD

The CCC viewed the contents of the Website and concluded that the advertisement was not misleading. The CCC noted that as confirmed by the complainant, the Advertiser has made good the deficiency to the consumer for this specific issue pertaining to using a “Netsafe virtual card” in place of debit card. The complaint was NOT UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: Modi Naturals Ltd
PRODUCT: Modi Naturals Ltd

COMPLAINT:

The package of Rice Bran oil claims, ‘India’s Finest Rice Bran Oil.’ It claims the benefits of ‘Suitable for Diabetics’, Cholesterol Reduction’, ‘Cancer Protection’ and ‘Skin Health.’

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

The above benefits have not been substantiated by any proofs specific to their brand as mentioned by them.

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The claim support data was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC viewed the contents of the product packaging and considered the Advertiser’s response for Review as well as the opinion of the Technical expert presented at the meeting. Based on the data submitted, the CCC concluded that - Claim – “Suitable for diabetics” - Refined Rice Bran Oil is rich in MUFA and PUFA and so considered good for diabetics. The clinical research reference given is not substantiating these facts. It is referring to water solubles and CONFIDENTIAL Page 4 of 25 insoluble present in stabilized Rice Bran. How this reflects in physically refined rice bran oil is not substantiated with data for Rizolo. The claim was not substantiated with clinical evidence. Claim, “Cholesterol reduction” was not substantiated with clinical evidence as the quantity of oryzanol present in Rizolo and how it helps in reducing cholesterol has not been proven. Claim, “Cancer Protection” cannot be attributed to Rice Bran Oil as incidence of cancer in various forms in humans is due to a variety of reasons . This claim was not substantiated with clinical evidence. Claim – “Skin Health” was not supported with clinical evidence substantiating the role of Rice Bran Oil in improved skin health. The CCC concluded that the claims on the pack contravened Chapter I.1 of the ASCI Code. The decision of complaint being Upheld stands on Review.

 

COMPANY: Mangal Pharma
PRODUCT: Madhu Care Churna

COMPLAINT:

“Sureshot Treatment/ Solution of Diabetes- Madhu Care Churna.”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The CCC viewed the print advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim in the Ad, “Sureshot Treatment/ Solution of Diabetes- Madhu Care Churna”, was not substantiated. Also, specific to the claim related to treatment of Diabetes, the Ad is in Breach of the law as it violated The Drugs & Magic Remedies Act. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and III.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: Ruia Agro Farm
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

1. Stop Eating Cancer Causing Fruits and Vegetables 2. India’s First property Recommended by Doctors

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The Advertiser was granted a personal hearing to present their case to the ASCI secretariat and submit a comprehensive written response. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s written response. The CCC concluded that the claim, “Stop Eating Cancer Causing Fruits and Vegetables”, is misleading by exaggeration. As per the advertiser, they are only selling land where organic farming may be carried out. Therefore, the claim “Buy an organic farm today” was considered misleading. The claim, “India’s First property Recommended by Doctors” shown along with the visual of a doctor, was not adequately substantiated with supporting proof and was misleading by ambiguity. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: Lotus Herbals Limited
PRODUCT: Lotus Herbals Youth RX

COMPLAINT:

1. A firmer and younger skin in just 7 days 2. In 4 weeks 96 percent of users have agreed that effects of ageing are almost gone

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The CCC viewed the TVC and considered the Advertiser’s response. Based on the data provided by the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the results shown on application of the product were for “firmer and younger skin” were not substatitaed for “seven day” data point as per dermatological assessment. Also the sample size of 33 users is small for self-assessment parameters. The CCC concluded that the claims, “A firmer and younger skin in just 7 days”, “ In 4 weeks 96 percent of users have agreed that effects of ageing are almost gone”, were inadequately substantiated. The advertisement contravened Chapter I.1 of the Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

COMPANY: Koneru Lakshmaiah Education Foundation
PRODUCT: KL University

COMPLAINT:

“100% placements in 2015.”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The CCC viewed the TVC. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim in the TVC, “100% placements in 2015”, was not substantiated. The TVC contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapter I.1 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

COMPANY: Aishwarya Educational Trust
PRODUCT: Audisankara Group of Institute

COMPLAINT:

1. Provide 100% placements 2. Depicts logos of several big companies implying placements there.

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The CCC viewed the TVC. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim in the TVC, “Provides 100% placements” was not substantiated. Also, the depiction of logos of several big companies implying placements there, is misleading. The TVC 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: Akansha Hair & Skin Care Herb Unit Private Limited
PRODUCT: Akansha Swarnali Fairness Cream

COMPLAINT:

1. Be fair within 3 weeks with dramatic change in appearance. 2. 100 % ayurvedic.

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The CCC viewed the TVC and considered the Advertiser’s response. The CCC concluded that the TVC does have the claim of “Fairness in three weeks” contrary to advertiser’s response. This claim ”, was not substantiated. The TVC contravened Chapter I.1 of the ASCI Code. This complaint was UPHELD. The claim, “100% Ayurvedic” was not false. This complaint was NOT UPHELD.

COMPANY: Wyeth Ltd
PRODUCT: Anne French All Natural Cream

COMPLAINT:

“Natural moisturiser that make skin 3 times softer”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: NOT UPHELD

The CCC viewed the TVC and considered the Advertiser’s response. Based on the data provided by the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “Natural moisturiser that make skin 3 times softer”, was substantiated with product efficacy data under before use and immediately after use conditions. The complaint was NOT UPHELD.

COMPANY: Flipkart Internet P. Ltd
PRODUCT: Xpert Commendo 6 White Black shoe

COMPLAINT:

In their website, price of Xpert Commendo 6 white black running shoe shows as Rs.1078 but that product price is 469/- only. They are cheating customers and if we complaint they are not responding properly. Kindly take action and fine that company and refund the buyers who buy from their website.

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The CCC viewed the Website advertisement. The CCC noted Flipkart’s reasons for considering that the claims did not fall within the definition of “advertisement”. The CCC considered that the claims, by providing information about the discounted pricing, were intended to influence the consumer’s purchasing decisions and as such, were directly connected with the supply or transfer of goods and within the scope of the definition of an “advertisement”. The CCC acknowledged that the alleged product is listed by the third party seller namely “UNNATI”, but did not agree that the process by which the content had appeared on the website relieved Flipkart of its responsibility to ensure that the content is not misleading the consumers because section 79 2 (c) of the IT Act also requires that "intermediary observes due diligence while discharging his duties ...". Also, there are numerous decisions by the consumer courts under the Consumer Protection Act which supports the CCC's view that a e commerce portal is responsible for content and claims appearing on its website given the customer orders, gets delivery, pays and corresponds only with the portal and portal in turn earns from the transactions. The CCC concluded that the website communication claiming the MRP of the product as Rs.1078, when actually printed MRP on product is same as being offered as the discounted price of Rs 469, distorts facts and is therefore misleading the consumers as to actual discount being offered. The Website communication contravened Chapter I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: Neem Jamun Kerala Ras
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

1. Natural source of iron, vitamin and calcium 2. Controls sugar and reduces sugar levels in just 7 days of its consumption 3. Completely cure diabetes in 6 months. 4. 100% organic 5. No side effects

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The CCC viewed the TVC. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims in the TVC, “Natural source of iron, vitamin and calcium”, “Controls sugar and reduces sugar levels in just 7 days of its consumption”, “Completely cure diabetes in 6 months”, “100% organic”, “No side effects”, were not substantiated. Also, specific to the claim related to cure of Diabetes, the Ad is in Breach of the law as it violated The Drugs & Magic Remedies Act. The TVC contravened Chapters I.1 and III.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

COMPANY: Healthy Heart Foods
PRODUCT: Healthy Heart Cooking Oil

COMPLAINT:

1. India's No 1 Brand. 2. Graphical representation in the advertisement is misleading.

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The CCC viewed the TVC. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim in the TVC, “India’s No.1 Brand”, was not substantiated. Also, the accompanying graphical representation in the TVC referring to the Consumer VOICE survey findings is misleading. The TVC contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

COMPANY: Saboo Sodium Chloro Limited
PRODUCT: Surya Salt

COMPLAINT:

1. Surya salt has right amount of Iodine that helps to take care of your heart. 2. Protects from high Blood Pressure so that you live long with good health

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The CCC viewed both the print advertisements and considered the Advertiser’s response. The claim, “Surya salt has right amount of Sodium that helps to take care of your heart and protects from high blood pressure so that you live healthy and for longer period”, is misleading as acceptability of Sodium level for every person will be variable. Also, the product being low sodium was not substantiated. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: Vibes Healthcare Limited
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

1. Get a flat belly without exercising. 2. Lipo Laser programs 60mins. 3. Quick Inch Loss & Quick Weight Reduction. 4. Lose up to 6cms from Waist, Hips and Thighs.

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Get flat belly without exercising discounts the benefits of exercises which is a wrong statement for obesity. Obesity is a disorder and exercising is a must. The complainant questions ‘How can 60mins of stipulated time give quick inch loss and quick weight loss?’ and ‘How specifically 6cms from waist, hips and thighs can be lost?

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The CCC viewed the print advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims in the Ad, “Get a flat belly without exercising”, “Lipo Laser programs 60mins”, “Quick Inch Loss & Quick Weight Reduction”, “Lose up to 6cms from Waist, Hips and Thighs”, were not substantiated. The advertisement contravened Chapter I.1 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: Shathayu Ayurveda
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“Special Detoxification at Shathayu Ayurveda increases the natural Insulin production in the body by activating Pancreases” and “Ayurveda says Diabetes is curable”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

The complainant questions ‘How does it increase the natural insulin production?’, ‘How can detox activate pancreas?’ and ‘Also the picture says diabetes is curable?”

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

m the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims in the Ad, “Special Detoxification at Shathayu Ayurveda increases the natural Insulin production in the body by activating Pancreases” and “Ayurveda says Diabetes is curable”, were not substantiated. Also, specific to the claim related to cure of Diabetes, the Ad 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: Jasper Infotech P. Ltd
PRODUCT: Snapdeal.com

COMPLAINT:

A man is shown riding a bike without helmet. This is unsafe practice and is a punishable offence. The advertiser might say that they have shot it in real life situation, even then such scenes or shots should be avoided.

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The CCC viewed the TVC and considered the Advertiser’s response. The CCC noted the Advertiser’s reason that the advertisement has been shot on location. The CCC opined that this particular frame depicting a man riding a bike without a helmet could have been avoided in the TVC and can be corrected with minimal change in the advertisement. The CCC concluded that the visual of “a man riding a bike without a helmet” as depicted in the TVC shows an unsafe practice. The TVC contravened Chapter III.3 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

COMPANY: General Motors India P. Ltd
PRODUCT: Chevrolet Beat

COMPLAINT:

It shows two cars running on road simultaneously on both the lanes, whereas in India the vehicles are supposed to run on the left side of the road. Such advertisements promote unsafe driving practices. There have been multiple instances when accidents occur due to driver's not following lane driving.

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: NOT UPHELD

The CCC viewed the TVC and considered the Advertiser’s response. The CCC concluded that the TVC does not promote unsafe/reckless driving. The complaint was NOT UPHELD.

COMPANY: Milcent Appliances Pvt. Ltd.
PRODUCT: Milcent GharGhanti Domestic Grinder

COMPLAINT:

The advertisement claims ‘100% Aluminium (Carcinogenic Cancer Causing Metal) Free Grinding chamber with lifetime guarantee.’ This kind of misleading statements are objectionable because they create panic in the minds of gullible people who think of buying such products. They must have read somewhere that the metal aluminium is one of the carcinogenic metals. But that does not mean any aluminium utensil is not fit for use. Now-a-days aluminium foil is available as food-wrap to keep rotis, chapatis, and etc. hot and other foods protected from dust and other pollutants. So manufacturing must use caution while making such generated mis-statements. If they want to maintain their claims, they must prove that the aluminium grinding chamber of any grinding mill will create cancer in patients or people who eat such pulverized materials. I think this kind of fraud of creating panic is the new advertising mantra to push their products

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. The CCC concluded that the claim in the Ad, “100% Aluminium (Carcinogenic Cancer Causing Metal) Free”, was misleading by exaggeration. Also, grinding in aluminium grinding chamber resulting in incidence of cancer was not substantiated with supporting evidence. The claim was also considered to be disparaging to “Aluminium” based product categories. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1, I.4 and IV.1(e) of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: Institute of Finance Banking and Insurance
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

The advertisement of ‘Institute of Finance, Banking and Insurance’ claims, “Become a Senior Officer in a Bank in just 6 Months.”, “Over 17,500 placed in the I.C.I.C.I bank.”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

The website of IFBI shows 32,500 placements since September 2006. For the IFBI course eligibility is graduation. The complainant questions ‘How can a graduate with 6months training at IFBI become a senior bank officer?’ Again the number of placements 17,500 in I.CI.C.I and 32,500 since inception is doubtful.

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The CCC viewed the print Ad and the website Ad and considered the Advertiser’s response. The CCC concluded that the claim, “Become a Senior Officer in a Bank in just 6 Months” is misleading and was not substantiated with support data. The claim in the print Ad, “Over 17,500 placed in the I.C.I.C.I bank”, and the Website claim, “32,500 Placements since inception in September 2006”, were inadequately substantiated with valid supporting data. The print Ad and the Website Ad 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: Odisha Television Ltd
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

Tarang TV shows itself as No.1 channel with the BARC GRP comparing TAM GRP for our channel SARTHAK TV

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

The comparison between channels should base on any one of the available sources. Here TARANG had taken data of two different sources for the comparison. The published BARC data is based on ALL HHs where TAM rating is based on CS 4+. As data of HHS & CS4+ are calculated on different samples, it is quite illogical to use both the data for a comparison. This kind of illogical comparison will misguide all Odia viewers and advertisers.

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. 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 Tarang TV’s claim of being the No.1 channel is technically incorrect as two independent databases have been compared. Though Sarthak TV is not covered by BARC data yet, the analysis of four available weeks of TAM data (weeks 11-14, attached) shows that Sarthak TV has been a consistent leader in the Oriya market. The data shown is therefore misleading. The advertisement violates Rule 6 of TAM guidelines as the estimate is misleading and also Rule 5 of TAM guidelines as it is based on single data points rather than the recommended averages. The subject matter of comparison confers an artificial advantage upon the advertiser so as to suggest that a better bargain is offered than is truly the case. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1, I.3, I.4 and IV.1(b) of the Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: Thyrocare
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“9 out of 10 thyroid patients are mothers” Thyroid disorders are more common in females. By saying 90% thyroid patients are mothers, thyrocare is lying & trying to instil fear, thereby forcing women for thyroid tests.

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser submitted general research articles indicating that the prevalence of Thyroid dysfunction among women. However, this data did not correlate with the claim. The CCC concluded that the claim, “9 out of 10 thyroid patients are mothers”, was not substantiated. The advertisement contravened Chapter I.1 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: Hindustan Unilever Ltd
PRODUCT: Ponds Men Energy Charge Face Wash

COMPLAINT:

In the advertisement, Varun Dhawans face undergoes 2 treatments from this face wash: Brightens and Energizes. The point to be noted here is that his face becomes far more whitish after applying the face wash than what his actual face colour is. Thus, this is a clear attempt to fool the consumers that they can achieve a false whitish complexion after applying this face wash.

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: NOT UPHELD

The CCC viewed the TVC and considered the Advertiser’s response. The CCC concluded that the images showing the model’s face becoming brightened and energised, is a creative visualisation. The complaint was NOT UPHELD.

COMPANY: Insight Media City (India) Private Limited
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

Flowers is a Malayalam channel of Insight Media City (www.insightmediacity.com). Ever since they launched in April 2015, they have been making what seems to be false claims using TAM data. Since the data details are not shown, and since we along with the rest of the industry has stopped using TAM as a rating currency, we have no way to verify this. Received a file mailer last week, and a whatsapp message today. The same is also being shared by their sales teams to clients and agencies. The data for their position as Number 2 or 3 claim, quotes TAM. Even going by the guidelines issued by TAM, such ads are incomplete and misleading. We also have no way (as mentioned earlier) to verify this, as the raw data is not available to most industry subscribers who have stopped subscribing to data. From what little we know from TAM data mailed to us by others or the BARC data that the industry follows, this data is factually wrong too. And, it is affecting us as a channel by misleading clients.

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The claim support data was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC viewed the Ads – promotional material and considered the Advertiser’s response as well as opinion of the Technical expert presented at the meeting. The promotional material in question does not tell the reader what is the estimate shown to establish the claim of being No 2 or No 3 and whether it is based on weekly GRPs or some other parameters. This violates Rule 7 of TAM Advertising guidelines. Also the claims are based on a single data point in each mailer which runs against Rule 5 of TAM Advertising Guidelines that recommends use of averages in such a situation. The CCC concluded that the claims, “Flowers emerges as clear No.2 in general entertainment space”, “Week 2 of launch Flowers continues to strengthen its position as clear No.3”, were not substantiated and were misleading. The subject matter of comparison confers an artificial advantage upon the advertiser so as to suggest that a better bargain is offered than is truly the case. The Ads – promotional material contravened Chapters I.1, I.3, I.4 and IV.1(b) of the Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: Lucknow Gramaudyog Sansthan
PRODUCT: Ultra Guide Detergent Powder

COMPLAINT:

“We are one step ahead than others”. ( “Auro se ek kadam aage”)

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

The claim of the Advertiser is unsubstantiated and misleading. The Advertiser herein claims to be ahead of or better/superior than all competitions in the market. The Advertiser is not only disparaging/belittling the competition but also misleading the consumers by making such a statement without required substantiation of their products being superior to the others competition products available in the market. The consumers are led to believe that the Advertiser’s products are superior to the rest of competition products in all aspects, be it in terms of quality, market share or sales. Laundry products cater to an extensive rural and bottom of the pyramid consumer base who are vulnerable to being easily misled with statements of superiority as being made by the Advertiser for their products. Such claims by the Advertiser would enable them to influence vulnerable consumer to purchase their products on misleading and unsubstantiated claims of superiority.

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. The CCC concluded that the phrase in the Ad, “Auro se ek kadam aage” (“We are one step ahead than others”) is a generic phrase, However, the basis of which was not provided. The advertisement contravened Chapter I.1 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: State Bank of India
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

SBI is advertising on their website that they are offering instant overdraft facility against fixed deposit on internet banking means no visit to branch is required. Now relying on their advertisement I have purchased fixed deposit of Rs40000 on 28/05/2015 in SBI via net banking and applied overdraft. Now the overdraft facility is nowhere accessible through net banking.”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: NOT UPHELD

The CCC viewed the Website advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. The CCC concluded that the claim offer of “SBI overdraft against fixed deposit”, is not false. The Website also provides information via FAQs/terms and conditions for availing this facility. The complaint was NOT UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: Sarthak TV
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

The advertiser has shown the viewership of the competitor channels in a bad taste. To substantiate its claim of more viewership the advertiser has considered those channels which can help its claim, but the entire competition should have been considered and not the few against which the advertisers numbers are more. The advertiser has intentionally dropped Prarthanas viewership as the same could have discredited it of its leadership claim. The advertisement is therefore purely misleading and malicious.

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

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. Sarthak TV is the leading channel in the Odisha market, as per weekly GVT data. The claim of delivering higher GVTs than all secondline channels shown in the Ad put together is not false. However, the CCC concluded that the claim of more viewership than other competitor channels is not based on at least 4 weeks of data as per rule 5 of TAM advertising guidelines. This confers an artificial advantage upon the advertiser so as to suggest that a better bargain is offered than is truly the case. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.3 and IV.1(b) of the Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: CavinKare Pvt Ltd
PRODUCT: Chik Egg White Protein Shampoo

COMPLAINT:

Claim – “Isska Egg White Protein damage baalon ko jad se sire tak nourish karke hair fall kam kare” (“Its Egg White Protein nourishes damage hair from root to tip and reduces hair fall”) The visual depiction shows strengthening of the hair roots by the Egg White Protein, resulting in reduction of hair fall, and strengthening of hair: The Product is alleged to be the “Perfect Solution” against hair fall:

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

e at the root of the hair, as depicted in the TVC. Further, to sustain the claim, it also needs to be demonstrated that the Egg White Protein in the product provides the benefit, and the not the product as a whole, considering the fact that the claim being made by the Advertiser is specifically with respect to the Egg White Protein in the product, and not the Product as a whole. The visual depiction shows strengthening of the hair roots by the Egg White Protein, resulting in reduction of hair fall, and strengthening of hair: It needs to be demonstrated by the Advertiser that the Egg White Protein in the Product, at the current dosage, would actually penetrate the hair roots, and the Egg White Protein would provide nourishment of the hair all the way to the tips. Further, where the depiction and voice over talks about hair fall, and visually shows nourishment of the hair, the disclaimer only talks about creative visualization. The disclaimer with respect to hair fall appears much later in the TVC. Clearly, the advertiser is misleading the consumer by avoiding appropriate disclaimers at appropriate places in the TVC. The Product is alleged to be the “Perfect Solution” against hair fall: It would mean and imply that upon usage of the product, there would not be any scope of hair fall. Further, it would also imply that the Product is the only product which can give perfect solution to the problem of hair fall, when compared to other products. To sustain such a tall claim, it is incumbent upon the Advertiser to demonstrate how the Product is the “PERFECT SOLUTION” to the problem of hair fall or protein loss. It needs to be demonstrated by the Advertiser that this Product is the perfect solution to hair fall problems, and that upon usage of the Product, hair fall problems would be resolved completely, considering the solution is perfect.

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The Advertiser representatives connected with the ASCI secretariat over phone for a detailed discussion on the claim support data prior to the meeting. Rationale for claim support data was discussed and the advertiser was willing to modify the claim wording and submitted a written response. The CCC viewed the TVC and considered the Advertiser’s response. The CCC concluded that – Claim – “Isska Egg White Protein damage baalon ko jad se sire tak nourish karke hair fall kam kare” (“Its Egg White Protein nourishes damage hair from root to tip and reduces hair fall”), was not substantiated with data specific to Egg White Protein. The visual depiction showing strengthening of the hair roots by the Egg White Protein, resulting in reduction of hair fall, and strengthening of hair, was misleading In view of the above, the claim of “Perfect Solution” against hair fall was misleading . The supers/disclaimers in the TVC were not legible. The TVC contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the Code and ASCI Guidelines on Supers. The complaint was UPHELD.

COMPANY: CavinKare Pvt Ltd
PRODUCT: Nyle Naturals Hairfall Defence shampoo

COMPLAINT:

“Blow dryer aur hair straightner se mere baal stylish to hue, par Jhadne bhi lage… (Blow dryers and hair straightners made my hair stylish, but my hair also started shedding) “Is Shampoo main hai nourishing natural ingredients. Ye shampoo baalon ka jhadna kam kare, aur unhe banaye strong and beautiful” (This shampoo has nourishning natural ingredients. This shampoo reduces hair shedding, and makes them strong and beautiful) “Baalon ke tootne ke karan honewale hair fall ko ghatakar mazbooti de” (Reduces hair fall due to breakage, and provides strength)

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

In the above mentioned TVC, the protagonist is seen to allege: Blow dryer aur hair straightner se mere baal stylish to hue, par Jhadne bhi lage… (Blow dryers and hair straightners made my hair stylish, but my hair also started shedding) Thereafter, it is claimed that: Is Shampoo main hai nourishing natural ingredients. Ye shampoo baalon ka jhadna kam kare, aur unhe banaye strong and beautiful. (This shampoo has nourishning natural ingredients. This shampoo reduces hair shedding, and makes them strong and beautiful) It is pertinent to note here that the claim, in Hindi Language, is clearly about “Baalon ka jhadna”, which means “hair shedding”, which would mean hair fall from the roots. While making this bold claim, the Advertiser, by way of a disclaimer, mentions: Baalon ke tootne ke karan honewale hair fall ko ghatakar mazbooti de (Reduces hair fall due to breakage, and provides strength) Hence, the said product only reduces hair fall due to breakage, and not hair shedding, as is being claimed in the voiceover. A disclaimer cannot be contradictory to the claim, and can only work to explain the claim further. However, in this case, the disclaimer beings out the blatant falsity in the claim of the Advertiser.

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The Advertiser representatives connected with the ASCI secretariat over phone for a detailed discussion on the claim support prior to the meeting and submitted a written response subsequently. The CCC viewed the TVC and considered the Advertiser’s response. The product reduces hair fall due to breakage, and not hair shedding from roots as is perceived by the term “Jhadna” which is associated with hairloss (being claimed in the voiceover of the TVC). The CCC concluded that the disclaimer, “Baalon ke tootne ke karan honewale hair fall …” is factual and the term “..baalon ka jhadna …” was considered to be misleading by ambiguity. The TVC contravened Chapter I.4 of the Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

COMPANY: Chehra Pahachaano
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

Misleading advertisements running a fraud contest. After answering the question, money is asked to be deposited to register by giving false promise of giving away an iPad.

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The details of the complaint were forwarded to the channel “Sahara One” requesting their help to provide with the advertiser’s contact details and to seek the advertiser’s response to address the grievance of the complainant. However, no response was received from the channel to ASCI’s repeated requests. The CCC viewed the TVC. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser or the channel, the CCC concluded that the TVC of “Chehra Pahachaano” contest is false, misleading and contravened Chapters I.1, I.4 and I.5(f) of the Code (“Ads inviting public to take part in prize competitions permitted under law or which hold out the prospect of gifts shall state clearly all material conditions as to enable the consumer to obtain a true and fair view of their prospects in such activities….”). The complaint was UPHELD.

COMPANY: TMA Hospitality Services Pvt. Ltd
PRODUCT: Ammi’s Biryani

COMPLAINT:

The website shows leg piece of chicken in their biryanis. According to Ammis Biryani, they don't serve chicken leg pieces as a matter of policy. Then lure the customers by showing something that they are not serving.

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. CCC viewed the Website advertisement and concluded that the advertisement is misleading and contravened Chapter I.4 of the Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: Sanzyme Ltd.
PRODUCT: Nutrus Slim Tea

COMPLAINT:

1. ‘Nutrus Slim Tea’ 2. ‘Reduces the risk of diabetes and cancer’

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

The complainant questions, ‘what is the proof that this product would help us slimming our body?’ and the claim of ‘Green tea reduces the risk of diabetes and cancer’ needs solid proof that green tea can cure diabetes and cancer. These claims are seemed to be inappropriate and highly misleading the consumers.

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 product packaging. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the Health Benefit claims such as “Weight Reduction” and , “Reduces the risk of diabetes and cancer”, was not substantiated. The pack claims contravened Chapter I.1 of the Code and clause 2 of the Guidelines on advertising of Food and Beverages. The complaint was UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: Gujarat Co-operative Milk Marketing Federation Ltd
PRODUCT: Amul Ice Cream

COMPLAINT:

“Eat Milk with Every Meal”, “real milk in every scoop of Amul Ice-Cream gives you a burst of real energy and Eat milk with every meal and celebrate life with a twist”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

It is evident from the advertisement that the Advertiser by making statements such as Eat Milk with Every Meal and Eat milk with every meal and celebrate life with a twist seeks to equate ice-cream to milk and also seeks to promote the consumption of ice-cream as being akin to milk. Therefore, the Advertisement seeks to promote ice-creams as being a replacement for milk, without any substantiation thereto. Furthermore, the Advertiser also claims that the real milk in every scoop of Amul ice-cream gives you a burst of real energy, without any substantiation in the form of a super. Therefore, it is submitted that the claims made by the Advertiser in the print advertisement is unsubstantiated, mischievously crafted to mislead the consumers, false and misleading and comes without any relevant disclaimers and qualifiers whatsoever. It is clear that the Advertiser needs to provide the basis on which the impugned claims have been made.

RECOMMENDATION: NOT UPHELD

The claim support data furnished by the advertiser in response to the complaint was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response as well as the opinion of the Technical expert presented at the meeting. CCC noted that “Eat Milk with Every Meal” is the advertiser’s tag line being used for a range of products. Ice cream is made from milk by adding milk fat, sugar, milk solids and permitted emulsifiers and stabilizers. The claim, “Eat milk with every meal”, is not false and is not considered to be in contravention of the ASCI code. In the context of the advertisement, the CCC did not consider that the Ad is referring to ice cream as equivalent to milk or a replacement to milk. The total calories provided by 100g ice cream vs milk is given to substantiate the energy claim made in the Ad. The CCC concluded that the claims made in the advertisement and cited in the complaint were substantiated. The complaint was NOT UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: Borges India Pvt. Ltd.
PRODUCT: Borges Extra Light Olive Oil

COMPLAINT:

The advertisement contains the following misleading and illegally titled product: 1. Borges Extra Light Olive Oil- This statement is completely incorrect and misleading. The FSSAI has notified the specifications for different types of olive oil under The Food Safety and Standards (Food Products Standards and Food Additives) Amendment Regulations, 2013 under section 2.2.1 (8) (2) vide its notification No. 5/15015/30/2012 dated 12th July, 2013. In the said notification, which is available at http://www.fssai.gov.in/Portals/0/Pdf/GazetteEnglish%2830-08-2013%29.pdf. The following types of oils are the only oils approved by FSSAI for promotion or sale in India: i. Refined olive oil, ii. Olive oil, iii. Extra virgin olive oil, iv. Virgin olive oils, v. Ordinary virgin olive oil vi. Refined olive-pomace oil, vii. Olive-pomace oil. As per these definitions, the citied advertisement misleads the consumer in the following ways. 1. There is no permitted category as; Extra Light Olive Oil as you will note from the list above. This category has been added by the advertiser to mislead the consumer into assuming there is something inherently light and therefore healthy about this product. In fact, this product is no different from olive oil (category 2.2.1 (8) (2) (A) (ii)) and there is nothing lighter or healthier about it. Nor is this category permitted by the International Olive Council, the international body head quartered in Madrid, Spain which regulates the worldwide standards for olive oil (permitted categories are specified in their website as per the following link http://www.internationaloliveoil.org/estaticos/view/222-standards) 2. Further, The Food Safety and Standards (Food Products Standards and Food Additives) Amendment Regulations, 2013 forbid the use of terms such as Super- Refined, Micro-refined, Double-refined, Ultra refined, Anti-cholesterol, Cholesterol Fighter, Soothing to heart Cholesterol Friendly, Saturated Fat free or such other expressions which are exaggeration of the quality of the Product. Extra Light is an exaggeration of the quality of the product. Some brands have even been prosecuted by FSSAI for use of the term Extra Light Olive Oil.”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. The advertise argues that the product is marketed and sold as “Borges Olive Oil” and “Extra light” is a description of the product taste. The clubbing together of the words “Olive oil” and “Extra Light” was an inadvertent error. The claim “Extra Light” was not substantiated with evidence. The CCC concluded that claim mentioned in the advertisement of “Borges `Extra Light Olive Oil” is false and misleading by omission. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: Sri Sri Ayruveda
PRODUCT: Yumlakki Instant Poha Mix

COMPLAINT:

dles in the market. It is the specific allegation and imagery pertaining to the depiction of a bowl of cooked noodles with noodles animated as snakes while the voiceover in Hindi says ‘leave poisonous Maida noodles, we present tasty breakfast of the ancient/traditional style’, which gives a distinct impression to the viewers that all noodles are poisonous and dangerous to consume. Generally noodles are made from Maida and this clearly amounts to disparagement of the entire instant noodles industry and disparages all brands of instant noodles including ours. The advertiser’s allegation is far from being factually correct and is without substantiation or documentation. Further, as stated earlier, the advertisement unfairly distorts and causes an adverse perception of the entire instant noodles industry in the minds of the consumer which is misleading in nature.

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The CCC viewed the TVC and considered the Advertiser’s response. The CCC concluded that the visual of “noodles being animated as snakes” with the voiceover “leave poisonous Maida noodles” (“Jeharilee maidewaali noodle chhodiye”), unfairly denigrated entire category of noodles products, distorts facts and is misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.4 and IV.1(e) of the Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

COMPANY: The Body Care Slimming and Beauty Clinic
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

1. Stay Slim Forever without Dieting. 2. 2.3 day slim program. 3. Fat reduction of 6 to 8cms. 4. Lose up to 10kgs.

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

The complainant questions, ‘How can one stay slim forever without dieting?’, ‘What is their 2.3 day slim program?’ and ‘How can fat reduction of 6 to 8cms happen instantly?’

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 in the Ad, “Stay Slim Forever without Dieting”, “2.3 day slim program”, “Fat reduction of 6 to 8cms”, “Lose up to 10kgs”, were not substantiated. The advertisement contravened Chapter I.1 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: Scoobee Bags
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

The advertisement shows the following could be in potential violation of the ASCI code. There are two things that is not good for children 1) Elephant dancing in the ad. Its cruelty to the animal. Different posture of the elephant is cruelty as its not normal positions. 2) Children cannot travel on board the school vehicle or they can put head and hands outside the vehicle. Young children are being exposed to wrong traffic rules.

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The CCC viewed the TVC and considered the Advertiser’s response. The CCC noted that the Elephant depicted in the TVC is a graphical representation and the TVC does not show cruelty towards this animal. This depiction of a dancing elephant was considered as a puffery and this complaint was NOT UPHELD. The visuals depicting children putting their head and hands outside the window while the vehicle is in motion, shows a dangerous practice, manifests a disregard for safety and encourages negligence. The TVC contravened Chapter III.3 of the Code. This complaint was UPHELD.

COMPANY: Aakash Institute
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

The complaint of the T.V commercial of Aakash Educational Services Pvt. Ltd. – Aakash Institute shows, “a boy pillion riding without helmet. An educational institute is promoting unsafe practices. Riding on a two wheeler without the helmet is a punishable offence.”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The CCC viewed the TVC and considered the Advertiser’s response. The CCC concluded that the visual of “a boy pillion riding a bike without a helmet” as depicted in the TVC shows an unsafe practice. The TVC contravened Chapter III.3 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: Honda Motorcycle & Scooter India Pvt. Ltd
PRODUCT: Honda Activa

COMPLAINT:

The advertisement was posted in Ahmedabad Mirror Newspaper dated 2nd June 2015. According to that the Activa-125 vehicle was available for loan at the lowest down payment of 5555 and the lowest installment of 999/month. I have a complaint for the misleading advertisement posted in Ahmedabad Mirror Newspaper dated 2nd June 2015. According to that the Activa-125 vehicle was available for loan at the lowest down payment of 5555 and the lowest installment of 999/month. Being a common man I was excited and was desperately planning my budget to buy this vehicle as per the scheme however when I visited the Showroom I came to know that there are two different schemes for the vehicle – 1. The down payment of 5555 is applicable when I pay the installment amount around 2053Rs/month for next 3-4years. 2. The installment amount of 999/month for 3-4 years is applicable when I pay the down payment of 40,000 Rs. Now this misleading advertisement and post knowledge of the scheme made me feel cheated and disappointed. As this was not clearly mentioned that there are two different schemes also there was no asterisk sign to mention that the conditions apply or any other symbol to mention it clearly.

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. The CCC concluded that the advertisement claiming schemes of “lowest down payment of 5555” and the “lowest installment of 999/month”, are misleading by ambiguity and by omission of a disclaimer qualifying the criteria of the individual schemes. . The advertisement contravened Chapter I.4 of the Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: Rupa & Company Ltd
PRODUCT: Macrowoman

COMPLAINT:

This female lingerie brand is running its vulgar advertisement during prime time. The advertisement is of lingerie where the contents are not suitable for family viewing. The advertisement is very vulgar and presents women in a degrading way. Turn advertisement into symbolic format. The current content is not suitable for family viewing.

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: NOT UPHELD

The CCC viewed the TVC provided by the Advertiser and considered their response. The CCC concluded that the TVC is not vulgar nor it is degrading women with regard to the product (lingerie) promoted in the TVC. The complaint was NOT UPHELD.

COMPANY: TVS Motors Co Ltd
PRODUCT: SAWAAL SULJHAAO STAR KI CHABI PAAO contest

COMPLAINT:

In the running footage of AAJ TAK channel there is a contest declared pertaining to IPL named SAWAAL SULJHAAO STAR KI CHABI PAAO "the web portal "www.sawaal suljhaao star ki chabi paao " shown is fake & public are being made fool , and are looted in the way of SMS charged Rs.3/ per sms. The practice is not in the public interest. Moreover the result of the contest is not declared. The contest seems to be a fraud if so the appropriate action must be taken against the channel. The innocent public is looted in way of sending SMS to win the contest.

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: NOT UPHELD

The CCC viewed the TVC and considered the Advertiser’s response. The Advertiser has provided authentic evidence (details of the correct URL of the contest, process followed for the contest, details of winners etc.) to prove that the contest of `SAWAAL SULJHAAO STAR KI CHABI PAAO’ is not fake. The complaint was NOT UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: Vikrant Happy Homes Pvt. Ltd
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

The advertisement of ‘OXYGEN-Vikrant Happy Homes Pvt. Ltd’ claims ‘Fully Furnished, Read-to-live Studio Apartments Rs.18.9 lakhs onwards.’ The advertisement which gives an offer price and also states about the fully furnished apartments is not a fact as the complainant has approached OXYGEN in the past on the same details and price. The apartment is different from the catalogue what is given but he confirmed that it will be the same. The price quoted in the catalogue was changed stating that the wrong rate list was referred.

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, “Fully Furnished”, “Ready-to-live Studio Apartments”, “Rs.18.9 lakhs onwards”, were false and not proven. The advertisement contravened Chapter I.1 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: Vicco Laboratories
PRODUCT: Vicco Turmeric Facewash

COMPLAINT:

Objectionable claims are being made in the Print Advertisement of the Product: In the Print Advertisement, it is being clearly said: “No oily skin No Pimples No blackheads”, “A one step solution to every girl’s skin care problem”. The claims are false, misleading, and derogatory to competition. It is claimed in the TVC that this product is the only solution to the face problems of a girl: In the TVC, the protagonist claims that: Vicco Turmeric Facewash… Har ladki ke face problems ka ek hi upay (… Vicco Turmeric Facewash… The only solution to face problems of every girl) The claim is untrue, unsubstantiated, and derogatory to competition. It is well known that there are various products in the market which work on problems like oiliness, pimples, blackheads, etc. The Advertiser will not have data to show that no other product in the market provides these benefits, and without such data, the claim is untenable. It is claimed that the product will completely and absolutely remove oiliness, pimples and blackheads: The Advertiser is asserting that upon usage of the Product, a consumer will not have oiliness, pimples and blackheads. Such a claim is absolute, and can be only be substantiated if the Advertiser is able to demonstrate, by way of a clinical study, that upon usage of the product, a consumer will get absolute relief from oiliness, pimples and blackheads.

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The Advertiser representatives were given a personal hearing by the ASCI Secretariat. The claim support data as submitted by the advertiser 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 the opinion of the Technical expert presented at the meeting. The advertiser has provided details of 2003 data on Vicco Turmeric Cream which cannot be correlated to the current formulation being advertised i.e. is not specific to the product of Vicco Turmeric Cream with Foam Base . The advertiser did not submit product composition details such as product licence to support the product category – whether a classical Ayurvedic product or a patent proprietary product. The Efficacy of the product as a face cleansing product with pimple removal benefits is not clearly established. The CCC observed that while claims such as oil removal, fighting pimples may be feasible with frequent use of the cleansing product, the claim, “No Pimples, No blackheads”, “Kyun ki (pimples / blackheads) hai hi nahi” is an absolute claim and was not adequately substantiated with efficacy data for this product. The print advertisement and the TVC contravened Chapter I.1 of the Code. This complaint was UPHELD. The claim in the TVC of , “har ladki ki skin problem ka ek hi upaay” was considered to be misleading. The TVC contravened Chapter I.4 of the Code. This complaint was UPHELD The claim in the print ad of “A one step solution to every girl’s skin care problem”, is a generic claim which was not considered to be objectionable. The CCC did not consider the advertisement to be derogatory to competition. This complaint was NOT UPHELD.

COMPANY: Prameya News7
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

The Advertiser has claimed to be the emerging leader among Odia News Channels by comparison based on one week data of % growth and claiming to be emerging leader among Odia news channels is completing misleading. The fact of the matter is as per week -19 data released by TAM, O TV remains the undisputed leader among Odia news channels. The total GRPs of all other Odia news channels taken together for week-19 is 79 points, whereas O TV leads the pack by 115 points. The advertiser has only highlighted the growth percentage data for week 18 and week 19 and not mentioned the GRP figures of all Odia news channels. If one starts with a 0 base, getting even 1 GRPS is considered a growth. Hence using growth percentage without the base no. is misleading. The week-20 GRP of Odia News Channels is O TV-115, ZEE KALINGA- 24, FOCUS ODISHA-15, KANAK TV-12, ETV NEWS ORIYA-7, PRAMEYA NEWS7- 6 and NAXATRA-2

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

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 the opinion of the Technical expert presented at the meeting. The viewership growth represented in the Prameya News 7 Ad is based on only one week’s data, which violates Rule 5 of TAM guidelines that advises taking a base of least 8 weeks data to arrive at a valid conclusion. The growth analysis based on weeks 1 to 14 shows that the growth for Prameya News 7 has not been consistent enough to establish a clear trend. Also as pointed out in the complaint, the growth is on a small base. A smaller channel Naxatra News shows a still higher growth than Prameya News 7. Rule 7 of TAM guidelines says that the estimate should be clearly stated. This confers an artificial advantage upon the advertiser so as to suggest that a better bargain is offered than is truly the case. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.3 and IV.1(b) of the Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: Poonam Developers
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

The above claim is present in the advertisement for the sale of the building flat in Poonam Avenue and Poonam Imperial. ‘NO-Stamp Duty, Registration Fee, Service Tax and V.A.T’ The complainant called up the number (09699108811) as given in the advertisement. The lady on the phone confirmed that the ‘NO-Stamp Duty, Registration Fee, Service Tax and V.A.T’ claim is only for Poonam Imperial and not for Poonam Avenue which is misleading.

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 claim, ‘NO-Stamp Duty, Registration Fee, Service Tax and V.A.T”, is false and misleading by omission. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: Flipkart Internet Private Limited
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

The advertisement of ‘Flipkart’ claims, “It is own and has alleged to provide people with high discount and be better than the conventional method of shopping. Flipkart has been inflating the price of the products listed on its website and then providing people with a heavy discount but at the same time providing the products at the MRP and thereby providing no discount but only a hint of satisfaction and thereby misleading people. This has a fold disadvantage. 1. People who believe that they have bought products at a discount a false sense of satisfaction that money has been saved. 2. it’s here where the middle-class is cheated. 3. People who believe that they have been provided with an discount tend to be regular customers and buy even more products. 4. They are likely to recommend it to their acquaintances which will then increase the company's turn over and even more profit can be reaped by the huge corporate the cost of the people. 5. This tends to again, make the local shopkeeper's lose out on their business as people are attracted by the false sense of hope that they are saving money by buying things from Flipkart. 6. Using unfair trade practices so as dominate the market are in contravention of the competition Act.

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The CCC noted Flipkart’s reasons for considering that the claims did not fall within the definition of “advertisement”. The CCC considered that the claims, by providing information about the discounted pricing, were intended to influence the consumer’s purchasing decisions and as such, were directly connected with the supply or transfer of goods and within the scope of the definition of an “advertisement”. The CCC acknowledged that the alleged product is listed by the third party seller namely “OBS” and “Canvera”, but did not agree that the process by which the content had appeared on the website relieved Flipkart of its responsibility to ensure that the content is not misleading the consumers because section 79 2 (c) of the IT Act also requires that "intermediary observes due diligence while discharging his duties ...". Also, there are numerous decisions by the consumer courts under the Consumer Protection Act which supports the CCC's view that a e commerce portal is responsible for content and claims appearing on its website given the customer orders, gets delivery, pays and corresponds only with the portal and portal in turn earns from the transactions. The CCC concluded that the website communication claiming the MRP of the product as Rs.799, when actually printed MRP on product is same as being offered as the discounted price of Rs 399 for Canvera and Rs. 999, when actually printed MRP on product is same as being offered as the discounted price of Rs 449 for OBS , distorts facts and is therefore misleading the consumers as to actual discount being offered. The Website communication contravened Chapter I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. CCC placed on record the prompt action taken by Flipkart of restricting the sellers “Canvera” and “OBS” from further sale of product on the website www.flipkart.com The CCC noted Flipkart’s response that the MRP of the LG product of Rs 18690 mentioned on the web-site quoted by the seller is not above the MRP as declared on the LG website. This complaint was NOT UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: Career Launcher
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

‘CL LST’ claims, “3 OUT OF 5 TOPPERS IN CLAT 2015 ARE LSTians, 7 State Toppers & Counting. These are again unverified results. Does it mean every 3 out of 5, if it implies so, who are the 7 state toppers and their details? Please investigate and put this defaulter co under SPI.

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 website advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim in the Ad, “3 OUT OF 5 TOPPERS IN CLAT 2015 ARE LSTians, 7 State Toppers & Counting”, was not substantiated. The website Ad contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapter I.1 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: Career Launcher
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

The advertisement of ‘CL Career Launcher’ claims, “CLAT CL Nagpur Students Create History! 1. Swarnima Mukharjee AIR 204, 2. Shrinkhala Shikhar AIR 606, 3. Shivani Dixit AIR 561, 4. Darshan Gandhi AIR 1472 These results are not validated. From what I have gathered from students studying there most of these kids are not from Nagpur/do not exist. These results are fabricated.

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 in the Ad, “CLAT CL Nagpur Students Create History! Swarnima Mukharjee AIR 204, Shrinkhala Shikhar AIR 606, Shivani Dixit AIR 561, Darshan Gandhi AIR 1472”, were not substantiated. The Ad contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapter I.1 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: TTK Protective Devices Limited
PRODUCT: Skore Condoms

COMPLAINT:

It shows a body work out of a couple in a gym. The ad is visualized in a gym with a boy and girl. It's serious. On a television and that to watching a family program you get to watch this disturbing Advertisement is obnoxious. The way the ad is picturized in a gym with a boy and a girl looks vulgar.

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: NOT UPHELD

The CCC viewed the TVC and considered the Advertiser’s response. The CCC concluded that the TVC is not so vulgar as to cause grave or widespread offence with regard to the product promoted (condoms). The complaint was NOT UPHELD.

COMPANY: Nalanda Education Society
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"100 % job Bond letter"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

The advertisement states "100 % job Bond letter" which is much obvious that a 100% job guarantee. Here the institute not only gives verbal guarantee but written. Please take necessary action.

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 claim in the Ad, "100 % job Bond letter", was not substantiated. The Ad contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapter I.1 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: Career Launcher
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“10/10 top Ranks in MNLUAT (NLU, Mumbai) are LSTians”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Unverified, misleading claim. Not substantiated by any source whatsoever. This company makes one false claim after another.. whatever is lodged with ASCI they remove that and make a new claim...by doing this they get to make that false claim for more than a month in the market...they should be put under SPI...there isn't a more deserving candidate for SPI than this company today across sectors.

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 claim in the Ad, “10/10 top Ranks in MNLUAT (NLU, Mumbai) are LSTians”, was not substantiated. The Ad contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapter I.1 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: Heinz India P. Ltd
PRODUCT: Complan

COMPLAINT:

COMPLAINT 1: The TVC is disparaging Horlicks, which is the market leader in the Malt Based Drink category The voice over is saying that ‘Leading health drink contains cereal based protein whereas Complan contains milk protein” This statement made in the voice over clearly disparages Horlicks as it is the leading health drink market share of 52.7% All India. By using the voice over to state that “Leading health drink contain cereal based protein whereas Complan contains milk protein” they are clearly disparaging Horlicks. Please refer to the All India Market share table below from the Nielsen retail audit, which clearly establishes Horlicks as not only a market leader in the Malt Based Drink category but Horlicks is also the leading Health drink. MS Vol MAT APR'15 HORLICKS 52.7 BOOST 13.2 BOURNVITA 15.9 COMPLAN 9.1 *As per AC Nielsen Retail Audit report MAT April’15 COMPLAINT 2: The TVC misleads consumers to believe that protein content of Complan gives fast growth The voice over in the TVC ’With the power of Milk protein I will grow fast‘ is also misleading There is data to show that with milk protein consumption there is optimal growth, however, a. There is no human intervention study which concludes that with milk protein intervention children will grow “FAST”. b. Also, linking the Milk Protein to the benefit of Fast Growth claim requires substantiation. For the above claim, which is recurring in their TVC’s, we request an outcome measure study that substantiates the above. Also, the same is in violation of Guideline 1 of the Self - Regulation Guidelines on Advertising of Foods & Beverages (F&B). COMPLAINT 3: The TVC misleads consumers to believe that protein content of Complan gives fast growth than the mix of cereal and milk protein in Horlicks The voice over is saying that ‘Leading health drink contains cereal based protein whereas Complan contains milk protein It is clearly indicating to consumers that the protein content in Complan gives fast growth as compared to the protein content in Horlicks (which is a mix of milk and cereal protein). There is no data which compares growth in children when given milk protein v/s a mix of milk and cereal protein. In the current TVC being complained against, they have continued to non-comply with the ASCI decision and are also disparaging the Category of Health Food Drinks.

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

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. The additional data provided by the Advertiser shows that milk-fed children benefit to a greater extent in linear growth etc. However as far as the compared Biscuits are concerned the Advertiser has only mentioned that Biscuits had comparable calories. There is no mention of the protein content of Biscuits. As such this reference is not adequate to support the claims for comparing fast growth between 100% milk proteins and Cereal based proteins in drinks. By emphasizing that Complan has 100% milk protein and comparing it versus other malt based drinks, the TVC is misleading by implication. By choosing this comparison, it bestows an artificial advantage on milk protein based drink and creates an impression that a better bargain is offered than truly is the case. The TVC contravened Chapters I.1, I.4 and IV.1(b) of the ASCI Code. Both the complaints (#2 and #3) being Upheld stands on Review.

COMPANY: Sun Infotech
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“Get Training in Tally Academy with Job Guaranteed”

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 claim in the Ad, “Get Training in Tally Academy with Job Guaranteed”, was not substantiated. The Ad contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapter I.1 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: Academy of Commerce
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“Central India's No.1 Brand”

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 claim in the Ad, “Central India's No.1 Brand”, was not substantiated. The Ad 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 Group of Institute
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“100% Job Placements”

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 claim in the Ad, “100% Job Placements”, was not substantiated. The Ad contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapter I.1 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: Koneru Lakshmaiah Education Foundation
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

1. The Leader in Placements 2. K.I.U Awarded Best Engineering Institute in Asia 3. 918 Placements in a single day! from a single Campus 4. KLU created history with 65% Placements on Day One (2014-2015) 5. K.I.U. University Awarded at National Level- - AAAA+ - Careers 360 - 2nd - Digital Mailer - 5th- Silicon India - 6th- Dainik Bhaskar - 8th - The Pioneer.

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 in the Ad, “The Leader in Placements”, “K.I.U Awarded Best Engineering Institute in Asia”, “918 Placements in a single day! from a single Campus”, “KLU created history with 65% Placements on Day One (2014-2015)”, “K.I.U. University Awarded at National Level- - AAAA+ - Careers 360 - 2nd - Digital Mailer - 5th- Silicon India - 6th- Dainik Bhaskar - 8th - The Pioneer”, were not substantiated. The Ad contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapter I.1 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: DPSG Dehradun
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

1. DPSG - The Best CBSE Day Schools of India Now in Dehradun 2. DPS Ghaziabad ranked No.8 in the country

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 in the Ad, “DPSG - The Best CBSE Day Schools of India Now in Dehradun”, “DPS Ghaziabad ranked No.8 in the country”, were not substantiated. The Ad contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapter I.1 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: L’Oreal India P. Ltd
PRODUCT: GarnierPureActive Neem+ Tulsi High Foaming Face

COMPLAINT:

“A New Blockbuster is here and further goes on stating that currently available Neem/Herbal Facewash only removes pimples. What if we can permanently remove the germs causing the pimples?”, “Garnier Pure Active Neem + Tulsi face wash removes 99.9% pimple causing germs” The advertisement in the pamphlets/leaflet features actor, Ms. Alia Bhatt, with a magnifying glass portraying her right cheek in a way indicating that her skin is clear, pure and spotless. The advertisement further reads “This May 2015, Introducing 1st FACEWASH that removes 99.9% pimple Germs”, “Removes 99.9% pimple germs”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

The advertisement in the pamphlets/leaflets primarily focuses on removing 99.9% PIMPLE CAUSING GERMS on application of the Neem + Tulsi Facewash. From the claim of being enable to Removes 99.9% Pimple Germs. It follows that Garnier is attempting to mislead the consumer by indirectly concluding that other neem/tulsi-based products in the market do not remove 99.9% pimple causing germs and hence, are inferior to the Garnier product that can remove the same. The 99.9% claim on the packaging further contains an asterisk which mentions that the said claim is the result of. In Vitro test on pimple causing germs without any reference to the date or place of the study undertaken and providing any details pertaining to the same. Furthermore, the advertisement claims that the Garnier product is the first face wash that removes 99.9% pimple germs. As one is aware, the present market is filled with face-wash products designed for acne and pimple prone skin; some of the products being Clean & Clear Pimple Clearing Face Wash Neutrogena Oil-free Acne Wash Himalaya Herbals Purifying Neem Face Wash Lakme Clear Pores Face clean up Lotus Anti-Acne Face Wash Nomarks Acne Pimples Face wash Olay Acne Control Face Wash Salicylic Acid Acne Cleanser When the above-mentioned face-wash products for pimple and acne prone skin are already available in the market, we fail to understand on what basis Garnier has claimed that their product is the first face wash that removes 99.9% pimple germs. Such a statement as above by Garnier is factually incorrect and is directed at distorting facts and misguiding the consumers into believing that Garnier’s product is a break-through product, not available in any other brand.

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The advertiser representatives were given personal hearing by ASCI. The claim support data was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC viewed the Pamphlets/Leaflets and the TVC, and considered the Advertiser’s response as well as opinion of the Technical expert was presented at the meeting. The data submitted explains the experimental procedure carried out to study the ‘Germ kill Efficacy ‘of the Neem+Tulsi face wash. . The test results just states 99.9 germ kill efficacy which is ambiguous. There is no mention of log reduction or percent reduction to comment on the antimicrobial efficacy of the said face wash. The rationale of antimicrobial action specific to ingredient/s (Neem / Tulsi / any other antimicrobial ingredient) linked to its concentration in the product was not provided. The claim of “removal of 99.9 % pimple causing germs” was not substantiated. The pamphlets, leaflets, and TVC contravened Chapter I.1 of the Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

COMPANY: Sarthak Entertainment Private Ltd
PRODUCT: Sarthak TV

COMPLAINT:

Sarthak TV's advertisement comparing viewership of channels with different genres to claim leadership position. The advertiser has published the advertisement with wrong intention to claim leadership. Channels of different genres should not be compared on one scale. An apple can be compared with another apple but not with grape.

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

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. Sarthak TV is the leading channel in the Odisha market, as per weekly GVT data. The claim of delivering higher GVTs than all secondline channels shown in the Ad put together is not false. However, the super does not indicate that the data is based on at least 4 weeks of data as per rule 5 of TAM advertising guidelines. The advertisement contravened Chapter I.3 of the Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: Sarthak Entertainment Private Ltd
PRODUCT: Sarthak TV

COMPLAINT:

The advertisement with bad tastes compares O TV (a 24X7 news channel) with General Entertainment Channels. The advertiser Sarthak TV has compared the viewership of O TV, a complete 24X7 Odia news channel with other General Entertainment. The comparison is unjustified, since the viewership of different genre channels cannot be compared. The advertiser has tried to create confusion among the viewers by comparing channels of different genres on one scale. The advertiser, Sarthak TV has done this with malicious intention.

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

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. Sarthak TV is the leading channel in the Odisha market, as per weekly GVT data. The claim of delivering higher GVTs than all secondline channels shown in the Ad put together is not false. However, the super does not indicate that the data is based on at least 4 weeks of data as per rule 5 of TAM advertising guidelines. The advertisement contravened Chapter I.3 of the Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: Sarthak Entertainment Private Ltd
PRODUCT: Sarthak TV

COMPLAINT:

The advertiser has selectively considered those channels of Competition, against which they can claim leadership. Alankar is a 24 X 7 movie channel and cannot be compared with a GEC. If the advertisement was meant to prove leadership against the competition the rating of the entire network channels should have been considered, intentionally the advertiser has left out the ratings of Prarthana and Tarang Music. Claims of the advertiser that, its viewership is higher than rest of the channels taken together is misleading, since the viewership of a few channels have not been included with wrong intention. The advertiser has also claimed of running original content, whereas it has been barred by the Honourable Court of Law to telecast two duplicate reality contents namely, Dance Queen and �Suna Bohu

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

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. Sarthak TV is the leading channel in the Odisha market, as per weekly GVT data. The claim of delivering higher GVTs than all secondline channels shown in the Ad put together is not false. However, the super does not indicate that the data is based on at least 4 weeks of data as per rule 5 of TAM advertising guidelines. The advertisement contravened Chapter I.3 of the Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: L’Oreal India Limited
PRODUCT: New Garnier Action Facewash

COMPLAINT:

“1 tone fairer skin”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

In the TVC, it is being claimed that the Product gives “1 tone fairer skin”. The above claim is qualified with the disclaimer “Self-assessment on 118 subjects. Firstly, the claim is not of a fairer looking skin, but a fairer skin itself. However, the Product in question is a facewash product. Hence, to sustain such a claim, it needs to be demonstrated by the Advertiser through strong clinical evidence that the Product delivers a physiological change in the skin tone, delivering a 1 tone fairer skin. Such benefit needs to be demonstrated through clinical evidence, as the claim is not about an instant benefit of a fair look, but fairer skin itself. The claim is a very specific claim, in which it is being alleged that the product delivers a specific benefit of 1 tone fairer skin. It is unclear as to how much is the quantum of 1 tone, that is being claimed by the Advertiser. The TVC does not demonstrate any such parameter for the claim. The claim seems to have been supported by way of a study in which 118 consumers were asked to self-assess their skin tone. The above raises the following questions: 1. Is a study conducted on 118 consumers a statistically significant study, basis which a claim can be made with respect to the performance of a product; 2. Basis the self-assessment of subjects, can a specific claim of delivery of 1 tone fairer skin be made, considering the fact that such a claim needs to be substantiated through clinical evidence and scores demonstrating 1 tone difference

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The advertiser representatives were given personal hearing by ASCI. The CCC viewed the TVC and You Tube advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. The product in question is a face wash product. The Advertiser has not demonstrated through clinical evidence that the product delivers a physiological change in the skin tone, delivering a 1 tone fairer skin. The advertiser argues that the product has a cleansing effect. By removing pollution elements from the skin the product impart a “fairer look”. The advertiser is implying a fair look and not physiological action. The CCC concluded that the claim, “1 tone fairer skin”, was not substantiated and was misleading by ambiguity. The TVC contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

COMPANY: The Institute of Education and Management
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“100% job Guarantee”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The advertiser was granted an extension as per their request. However no claim support data was submitted by the advertiser. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. The CCC concluded that the claim in the Ad, “100% job Guarantee”, was not substantiated. The Ad contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapter I.1 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: Fortis Healthcare Limited
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

It is an ad for plastic Surgery and Reconstructive procedures. It includes a list of procedures, departments, offers and contact persons. The ad contains the photo of a model in the upper half and text below. The photo has multiple inserts around it. 1. The title of the ad is - 'LOOK YOUR BEST'. The message being - ' look your best by undergoing plastic surgery'. My question- Is it ETHICAL/LEGAL to advertise surgery to look better? 2. Can plastic surgery guarantee or even have a high chance to- 'LOOK YOUR BEST'? The ad is blatantly dishonest in this regard. Can a small chin-tuck or nose-lift or hair transplant be called 'looking your best'? too much exaggeration for a surgical procedure. 3. There is enough evidence in medical literature and in known cases too where such procedures have gone terribly wrong. eg, Pop star Michael jackson's multiple surgeries, Actress Shilpa Shetty's nose and an actress's recent failed liposuction procedure. They 'do not mention the risks involved' and 'any disclaimer is absent'. They are trying to hide the risks from clients/patients. 4. The biggest problem is the photo designed by some graphic artist- it shows small pieces of layers of old skin peeled off from the model's face, and those pieces illustrate the procedures themselves. But if you look carefully, the underlying face/skin is much lighter in complexion. The peeled off pieces are visibly darker. They are trying to promote fairer skin through plastic and reconstructive procedures. This and similar ads by Fortis Hospital need to be stopped immediately”.

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 advertisement does not refer to criteria applicable for cosmetic surgeries and by presenting this as a “limited period discount” offer could encourages unsafe practices. Also, the advertisement is misleading by omission of a disclaimer qualifying the risk factors involved. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.4 and III.3 of the Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: Amity University
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"QS ranked Amity 18th among world universities for distance education".

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Theses are the universities which exploit aspirations of prospective students and their parent's money. This university also claims as a no-m profit pvt university. I wonder where do they get money to for such HUGE advts in different media. This is also need to be probed. Claim needs to be substantiated.

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 claim in the Ad, “Distance Learning Programmes ranked #18 worldwide by QS”, was not substantiated. The Ad contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapter I.1 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: BSNL
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

BSNL offers new connection online and claims that a person will visit you to collect forms and documents required for the connection. But in reality this is a big lie, they are advertising service which is plainly denied by the person assigned by BSNL local unit. This is a false propoganda, I have applied many times but the persons whose names were sent to me they denied the service. I applied as per their advertisement in their site, they sent me message that so and so person will contact me and as per the system the person will collect documents from me, but this service is not available at all. It is a false claim that BSNL has made in their website. Their promotional statement is as follows--- .....NOW BSNL AT YOUR DOORSTEP Now registering for LandLine or BroadBand is made easy. Follow any ONE option Below Option 1: Simply Fill up following Form or option 2 : simply send SMS the following to 54141 (BSNL mobile)/ 9400054141 (other operators like airtel, vodafone,aircel..etc) 1. LL for land line 2. BB for BroadBand 3. LL+BB for LAndLINE and BROADBAND 4. OTHERS for any other like EVDO,WIMAX, 3G DATA Card etc... ex: send LL to 54141 for landline Our Sales team will come to your DoorStep to collect documents and provide the connection

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 Website advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the promotional claim, “.....NOW BSNL AT YOUR DOORSTEP…. Our Sales team will come to your DoorStep to collect documents and provide the connection”, as mentioned on the website and cited in the complaint, is false. The Website advertisement contravened Chapter I.1 of the Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: HealthCare Global Enterprises Limited
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

I was working in the hospital for some time & left on 4-10-2013. My name was written on the board & displayed in the hospital till date. Till date my name is not deleted from the hospital board. My name ideally should be deleted on 4-10-2013. It will mislead patients.

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The CCC viewed the contents of the display board of the hospital and considered the Advertiser’s response. The CCC concluded that the Advertiser has used the Complainant’s name without his permission, which is misleading and confers an unjustified advantage for their hospital. The content of the display board contravened Chapters I.3 and I.4 of the Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: ANIHM Institute of Hotel Management
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

The advertisement states "100 % job Bond letter" which is much obvious that a 100% job guarantee. Here the institute not only gives verbal guarantee but written.

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. The CCC concluded that the claim in the Ad, “100% job bond letter”, was not substantiated with valid authentic data. The Ad contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapter I.1 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

 

COMPANY: Living Media India Ltd
PRODUCT: India Today

COMPLAINT:

Advertisement depicts a graph showing 4 News Channels i.e. INDIA TODAY, TIMES NOW, CNN IBN & NDTV 24*7 and in the graph table it’s displayed that INDIA TODAY is leading the market by holding 33.1 % of Market share, followed by Times Now channel with 24.8 % of Market share, CNN IBN with 10.5 % of Market share, NDTV 24*7 with 10 % of Market share. The Advertisement is nothing but a negative portrayal of image of other channels as this advertisement in question does not even include the name of channel ‘NewsX’ and also the total market share shown in the advertisement is 78.4% rather than 100%. ‘NewsX’ is holding the share of almost 22% and the advertisement depicts another channel to be at 3rd position whereas as per actual rating ‘NewsX’ holds 3rd position for respective week and India Today circulated this advertisement just to mislead the audiences by not showing the total market share of 100%. As per the standard practices followed by all channels while calculating the market share, each and every channel of the same genre becomes the part of data analysis along with the percentage of market share hold by that respective channel. It is pertinent to note that no channel follow such practices as the same followed by India Today in this respective advertisement. By disclosing the wrong information for the purposes of substantiating the Claim made by India Today, the Advertisement is completely false, misleading, factually incorrect, and even disparaging to the other news channels, including INDIA TODAY competitor channel NewsX. INDIA TODAY in its promos telecast on its channel dated 12/06/2015 has not disclosed any source i.e., the TAM/or any other data rating relied upon by it to arrive at their Claim to be ‘No.1 English News Channel’. As per the standard practice followed by all channels, every promo in connection with the target rating points, typically clearly discloses the: (i) the source of information; (ii) the period of analysis; (iii) the markets for the said analysis; (iv) the day-parts; and (iv) the target group. It is pertinent to note that INDIA TODAY has by telecast such a misleading promo shown complete disregard to and have made a mockery of the guidelines and the standard industry practice that is generally followed by all the channels.

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 promo e-mailer. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that by disclosing the wrong information for the purposes of substantiating the claim made by India Today, the advertisement is false, misleading, and disparaging to the other news channels. The promo e-mailer contravened Chapters I.1, I.4 and IV.1 (e) of the Code. The complaint was UPHELD

 

COMPANY: TV 18 Broadcast Ltd.
PRODUCT: CNBC

COMPLAINT:

In the impugned advertisements, CNBC has referred to and relied upon TAM data, source being – TAM CS AB Males 25+ All India, Wk-15-23 24 hrs, Market Share basis 30 mins GTVTs Claims - “CNBC –TV18 # 1 - CNBC –TV18: 59%, ET Now : 24%”, “CNBC –TV18 # 1 ALL INDIA – ALL INDIA 59%”, “TAM Reaffirms CNBC –TV18’s # 1 Position”, “In All India CNBC –TV18 Leads With 59%, ET Now at 24%” All the claims reproduced verbatim made by CNBC on its channel are factually inaccurate, misleading, disparaging and deliberately made to harm other English Business News channels for the following reasons: The claim of ALL INDIA # 1 is misleading, faulty, inaccurate, by deliberate omission – This claim of ‘All India # 1’ mischievously and misleadingly conveys to the viewers at large, that CNBC is No.1 TV channel across all genres and/or that CNBC is No. 1 TV channel in India. Admittedly, the TAM data is only for English Business News channels generated for the specified weeks, which has been used for claiming No. 1 position in India, by CNBC. By doing so, CNBC18 has disparaged all TV channels operational in India. CNBC’s claim of having market share of 59% basis the specified source is inaccurate and claimed by deliberately omitting the market share of English Business News channel – ‘NDTV Profit’ which has a market share of 8% during the mentioned weeks. Nevertheless, even after excluding the 8% market share of ‘NDTV Profit’ during the relevant period, CNBC’s market share stands at 58.2%, and not 59%, as communicated by it. The correct market share of CNBC, as also verified by TAM, is 52.2% for the specified period. As part of its design, in order to justify its false and misleading claims, CNBC has fraudulently put reliance on the rating agency –TAM. This act has jeopardised credibility of TAM, apart from being done intentionally, inter alia, to justify questionable, untenable unsubstantiated claims of- India’s No.1 TV channel.

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

The claim support data was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC viewed the promotional videos and considered the Advertiser’s response as well as the opinion of the Technical expert presented at the meeting. The CCC concluded that the period of comparison is adequate. The statistical computations of ratings shares appear acceptable. The exclusion of 'Females' from the calculation makes the 'All India leadership' claim questionable. The advertiser (CNBC TV18) has ignored all business news channels in languages other than English, without specifying this exclusion. Taking into account the viewership for business news channels in Hindi, Gujrati etc. The claim, “‘No. 1 TV channel in India” is not substantiated and is misleading. The promotional videos contravened Chapters I.1, and I.4 of the Code. This complaint was UPHELD

COMPANY: Shree Cement Limited
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

Cement Manufacturing Co Ltd. had appointed HTA Marketing Services Pvt Ltd as advertising consultant for its brand Star Cement, commencing from 1st December, 2012. HTAMS created a campaign for Star Anti Rust Cement for the Bihar market. The headline in the campaign was ‘Jung Ki No Entry’. Quite recently, Shree Cement Ltd. has launched a campaign nationally for its Jung Rodhak Cement, with the same headline - ‘Jung Ki No Entry’. Company(Shree Cement) website: http://www.shreecement.in/brands.html. This is a clear case of plagiarism and we would request immediate action

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: NOT UPHELD

The CCC viewed the Ad of the Complainant and the Ad of the Advertiser, and considered the Advertiser’s response. The CCC concluded that the Advertiser provided evidence to prove that they were the first in the trade and business to invent and adopt the tagline/slogan, “Jung Ki No Entry” in the year 2012. Also, they have filed necessary trademark applications for registration of the tagline/slogan mark with the Trade Marks Registry. The complaint was NOT UPHELD.

 
 

Complaint to
WhatsApp
DID YOU KNOW?

Developed by Wishtree Technologies LLP