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

Select Month :

 
ASCI Recommendations
 

COMPANY: "Axis Bank Ltd. "
PRODUCT: "Business Banking Solutions "

COMPLAINT:

“Complete business banking solution”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"This advertisement is completely deceitful and misleading as they refused to provide me the simple retail service which every bank is providing. Find enclosed the correspondence whereby they are refusing to provide the basic services which every other bank is offering. Their ad is definitely a trap and it needs to be stopped immediately and Axis bank should be penalized for misleading the customers. "

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

"The CCC viewed the TVC / YouTube advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response for Review. While the advertiser had initially informed ASCI that the product solicited by the customer is not something which the bank can offer as per RBI regulations and the same has been duly communicated to the customer; in the formal request for review, the advertiser did not refer to this RBI regulation. The advertiser argues that “The Business Banking TVC speaks about generic “Forex Solutions” and not of any specific feature of the same. The TVC also has a qualifier. The CCC concluded that the claim “complete business banking solutions” is false and is misleading by ambiguity as there are certain restrictions in the features offered by the Bank. Also, the hold duration and the language of the disclaimer are not as per ASCI Guidelines on Supers. The TVC / YouTube advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code and the ASCI Guidelines on Supers. The complaint is Upheld on Review. "

 

COMPANY: "Bharti Airtel Ltd (Airtel) "
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"The group of friends are enjoying their vacation on a snow covered mountain top. Suddenly they realize that they are getting airtel 4g signals even at that place. Right now Airtel 4g network is available in only 15 cities in India. It is not even available in tier 2 cities and the advertisement shows that the network is available even on desolated places like mountains! This is completely misleading to the users. "

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION:NOT UPHELD

"The advertiser representatives were given personal hearing by ASCI. The CCC viewed the TVC and considered the Advertiser’s response for Review. Advertiser argues that as mentioned in TVC supers, the claim “India’s Widest 4G Network” is based on the fact that Airtel is the only operator in India having 4G network in 15 out of the 22 telecom circles spread across 300+ towns as of 2nd March, 2016. Advertiser submitted COAI letter as a third party proof of their coverage in locations across the country in these towns. In addition, the advertiser provided evidence of 4G coverage near the locations mentioned in the TVC (Mashobra). The CCC concluded, that the claim “India’s Widest 4G Network” and reference of 4G network being available near Mashobra was substantiated. The complaint is NOT UPHELD on Review."

 

COMPANY: "Clat Forum "
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"“Meet the toppers of CLAT"" “Neha Lodha – Clat ‘15” "

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"“This advertisement is falsely portraying Clat topppers from this institute. This institute is projecting that all these toppers belong to there coaching centre which is not the case. They are trying to mislead the customers & trying to cheat them. Kindly check there credentials. Neha lodha is not the clat 2015 topper but it is akash jain ( list of top of 5000 rankers send to you). So the claim of the advertiser is false. Secondly none these students are part of the advertiser's institute as this institute has just started few months back so it is not possible that all these toppers belong to this institute. Finally he is also misleading the students by saying ""Meet the toppers of CLAT"" in the leaflet which gives a feeling that all these toppers are going to be the part of the seminar.""

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The CCC noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date. The CCC viewed the print advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims, “Meet the toppers of CLAT", “Neha Lodha” shown as “Clat ’15 Topper”, were false and were misleading by implication. As per data submitted by the complainant and information available in the Public domain, Akash Jain was the Clat ’15 Topper. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY: "Havells India Limited "
PRODUCT: "Standard Fans"

COMPLAINT:

“Best in the Industry Air Delivery”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"“This is to bring to your notice that we have come across an advertisement in fans category which showcases a wrong claim and misleads the public. Standard Fans has been using on pan India basis on leading channels a Television Commercial wherein a claim of their products providing “Best in the Industry Air Delivery” has been made. The commercial under reference features actress Ms Alia Bhatt and shows her cleaning the floor during which process the bucket of water overturns and spills water all over the floor. The floor is then dried up with the help of a ceiling fan. The claim is then made in the form of a caption “Best in the Industry Air Delivery”. TVC link: TVC is also available on Youtube and following is the link for the same: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NsW0IybijZ4 Our Complaint on the advertisement: They have not specified in the TVC which product they are referring to and on what basis the claim of “Best in the Industry Air Delivery” is being made. It gives the consumer the impression that all Standard brand fans have best in the industry air delivery. The above claim is not substantiated by any independent test reports. Tests done by us show that their claim is not borne out by facts. Attached herewith is the report of test done in our in-house Test laboratory and results clearly indicate that Standard Fans don’t have the highest Air Delivery in the industry so the claims are misleading for public at large. In light of the above facts, it is clear that the advertiser is misleading the public by being vague and at the same time making wrong, unsubstantiated claims” "

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. The claim support data was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC viewed the TVC and considered the Advertiser’s response as well as opinion of the Technical expert presented at the meeting. The advertiser argues that "Standard" is the brand name (amongst others) under which they sell fans, and the ad refers to those products. By stating in the impugned TVC that the Standard fans provide “Best in the Industry Air Delivery”, the Company has only engaged in “puffing” of its own product and the TVC is not in violation of any legal principles. The CCC noted that both, the complainant and the advertiser, have given in-house test reports as per a BIS standard test to show their product performance. The advertiser has not given any comparative test data against other industry products to prove superiority of their product over others to claim “Best in the Industry Air delivery”, but limited it to their own products. The complainant's report is a comparative report testing their product as well as the Standard fan by Havells’. In the complainant's comparative test, the product under question does not come out as “the best in the industry” for air delivery nor has the advertiser provided any comparative data. The CCC concluded that the claim of "Best in the Industry Air Delivery" is not substantiated. The claim implies better performance versus other products in the market and this comparison is not factual. There is likelihood of the consumer being misled about the product advertised. The CCC also disagreed with the advertiser’s contention of the claim being puffery. The CCC referred to another judgement of the Delhi high Court in the matter of Colgate v/s HUL in 2013, that while hyped up advertising may be permissible, it cannot transgress the grey areas of permissible assertions, and if it does so, the advertiser must have some reasonable factual basis for the assertion made. It is not possible therefore for anybody to make an off the cuff or unsubstantiated claim that his goods are the best in the market. In view of report submitted by the complainant, claim "Best in the Industry Air Delivery" was found to be unsubstantiated. The claim is also likely to mislead the consumer that all Standard brand fans have “best in the industry air delivery”. The TVC contravened Chapters I.1, I.4, IV (c), (d) of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY: "Balaji Cars Pvt Ltd (Balaji Cars) "
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"It is mentioning it's address of showroom at kalyanhttp://www.balajicars.com/contact-us.php The address mentioned of car showroom at kalyan is actually in bhiwandi taluka and not in kalyan or thane. it is misleading consumers as this place is 20 km away from kalyan and is actually in bhiwandi .please ask them to correct” "

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION:NOT UPHELD

"The CCC viewed the website communication of the postal address of the showroom and did not consider it to be in contravention of the ASCI code. The complaint was NOT UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY: "Pratham Education "
PRODUCT: "Crash Course Batch 2016"

COMPLAINT:

"• “Crash Course Batch 2016” • “6 All India Rank 1’s in Entrance Exam of 2015” • “AIR 1, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 13, 14, 15, 17 & 20 in Shaheed Sukhdev College of Business Studies” • “AIR 1, 2,3,4,5,7,11, 13, 15, 16, 18 &20 In IP University BBA Course” • “AIR 1 In IP B.Com” • “AIR 2,4,5,7,8,9,13,16,17,18,19 In Delhi University BBE Entrance in 2015” • “AIR 5,38,45 in IP BJMC & AIR 2,4,16,19 in Delhi University BMMMC Entrance in 2015” • “51 out of Top 100 Final selections in Delhi University BMS/BBA (FIA) Entrance in 2015” • “23 Final Selections in the Oberoi’s Entrance in 2015, were Pratham Students” • “37 Final selections in IN IIM Indore in 2015” "

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"Complaint no.1 “Announcing crash course batches and claiming AIR 1 and other top ranks in various entrance exams conducted in 2015. There is no proof and audit reported for the claimed results. The advertisement says 6 AIR 1 but there are pics of only 5 students. This doesn't justify their claim. I want to know the authenticity of the claimed results.” Complaint no.2 “Advertisement in Times of India, New Delhi –NCR edition, dated 1st April, 2016 page 3 http://epaperbeta.timesofindia.com/Gallery.aspx?id=01_04_2016_003_027&type=A&eid=31808 1. Pratham Education classes has published names of various rank holders in their advertisement and also claiming that 6 all India Rank 1's in Entrance exams of 2015 are their students. Do they have any backing data to prove that these are All india rank holders? On what parameters they are claiming that these are their students? 2. They have specifically used following claims: 51 out of Top 100 Final selections in Delhi University BMS/BBA (FIA) Entrance in 2015 - 23 Final Selections in the Oberoi’s Entrance in 2015, were Pratham Students - 37 Final selections in IN IIM Indore in 2015 These Universities don’t publish any such list of selected students, do they have any supporting documents/details to substantiate these numbers? Do they any proof for this selection? Getting call doesn’t mean that student got selected. They should be asked to substantiate that numbers, details of students used in their advertisement are authentic. It seems that these numbers are vague merely used to allure students. This advertisement is misleading and exaggerated.” "

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing. The advertiser sought additional time of seven days to respond to the complaint which was granted to them. A written response was submitted by the Advocate on behalf of the advertiser. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advocate’s response. The advocate argues on behalf of advertiser that the student Anusha Sinha, secured All India Rank 1 in two disciplines, namely AIR 1, BMS, Delhi University, as well as AIR 1 in BBA (FIA), and both these ranks along with the names of the institutions have been displayed below the picture of the said Anusha Sinha, a student of Pratham. The Advertiser did not provide any authentic data to prove that Anusha Sinha was a student of Pratham Education or had indeed ranked first as claimed. This claim was not substantiated and was misleading by ambiguity. The Advocate cited non-disclosure policy of the Institute pertaining to sharing of information of the students to third party and did not provide any substantiation for any of their claims. No documents were submitted by the advertiser to support their stance of the contractual obligations with the parents as mentioned in their response. The CCC did not consider the advertiser’s response to be valid considering the nature of data being requested as claim support was only generic to prove educational qualification / status of being their student.The CCC concluded that in the absence of any authentic supporting data “6 All India Rank 1’s in Entrance Exam of 2015”, “Crash Course Batch 2016”, “AIR 1, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 13, 14, 15, 17 & 20 in Shaheed Sukhdev College of Business Studies”, “AIR 1, 2,3,4,5,7,11, 13, 15, 16, 18 &20 In IP University BBA Course”, “AIR 1 In IP B.Com”, “AIR 2,4,5,7,8,9,13,16,17,18,19 In Delhi University BBE Entrance in 2015”, “AIR 5,38,45 in IP BJMC & AIR 2,4,16,19 in Delhi University BMMMC Entrance in 2015”, “51 out of Top 100 Final selections in Delhi University BMS/BBA (FIA) Entrance in 2015”, “23 Final Selections in the Oberoi’s Entrance in 2015, were Pratham Students”, “37 Final selections in IN IIM Indore in 2015”, were not substantiated and were considered to be misleading by ambiguity and implication. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY: "Naaptol Online Shopping Private Limited (Naaptol.com)"
PRODUCT: "Electric Pest and Insect Control Machine"

COMPLAINT:

“It is shown that it helps in driving away mosquitoes, cockroaches, silverfish, Rodents, Lizards.”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"“On TV, and even on their website they advertise about this electric pest and insect control. It is shown that it helps in driving away mosquitoes, cockroaches, silverfish, Rodents, Lizards. They say that the ultrasonic sound waves will drive them away. I ordered this product going by the advertisement and paid Rs. 1900 for the product. But on receiving the product the user manual doesn't say that it is effective for lizard. Even on the website of Naaptol it is clearly written in FAQ section that it is not effective for lizards. http://www.naaptol.com/search.html?type=srch_catlg&kw=electric%20pest%20and%20insect%20control. This is the site, if you paste this address, you'll see the advertisement even on their portal. I have been cheated by Naaptol and not the manufacturer since their no such claim made on the used manual about it being effective of Lizards. It says it's only for rodents, silver fish and some other small insects. Even mosquito is not mentioned. Naaptol is misleading customer through this advertisement about making false claim about this product that it helps in driving away lizards from the house. PFA the screen shot of the advertisement. I have mentioned the web address while filing a complaint on your site address of the advertisement. It's available of You Tube” Buy Electric Insect & Pest Control Machine Online at Best Price in India on Naaptol.com.” "

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the advertisement and the video demonstration about the product and its features and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser submitted a self-certificate of the supplier with a declaration that the product is effective against pests such as rats, mice, cockroaches etc. There was no test report submitted to prove the product efficacy nor any authentic scientific literature to support the claim. The CCC concluded that the claim, “Drives Away Insects & Pests.” is false and is misleading by gross exaggeration. The TVC contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY: "Clinic Dermatech "
PRODUCT: "Weight Loss by Cryosculpting"

COMPLAINT:

“Eliminate stubborn fat in the coolest possible way. No Needles No Special Diet No Supplements No Surgery No Downtime”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

“Ad on 27th March 2016, shows the pic of an obese woman holding her abdominal fat with the fingers and the tag line says-" Tyres are meant for roads..." It advertises losing stubborn fat without needles; without diet; without surgery; without exercise; using laser (probably) called "Cryosculpting"! Offers 51% off for NEXT FEW DAYS. The ad is misleading by promoting cures of obesity without exercise and a diet plan. Tells people to go for quick weight loss without change in lifestyle. Plus No Disclaimer of dangers. And time-bound offer of discount.”

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser submitted copies of scientific studies referring to the Cryolipolysis technique. The data provided by the Advertiser does not conclusively prove efficacy of the treatment. The CCC concluded that the claim “Eliminate stubborn fat in the coolest possible way - Cryosculpting” was not substantiated and was misleading by gross exaggeration. The reference to “No Special diet” “No supplements” was considered to be misleading by ambiguity as the procedure alone would not provide a patient with the benefit of fat elimination. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. The claims of “No Needles, No Surgery, No Downtime” which were descriptive of the procedure were not considered to be objectionable. This complaint was NOT UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY: "Salzpa’s -HSR "
PRODUCT: "Salt Room Therapy (100% Natural Drugless Therapy from Europe) "

COMPLAINT:

"“Founders Of Salt Room Therapy” “Under the Guidance of Prof. Alina Chervinskaya. MD. Ph.D""

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"“Salzpa is a bangalore based company just started in April 2016, providing salt room therapy, a treatment for Respiratory and Skin problems. with reference an advertisement (Photo Attached with this mail) published in Times Of India News Paper, Bangalore Edition, 10th page under the Company name Salzpa on April 7th 2016, they are trying to mislead the public and prospective patients by advertising wrong claims on Salt Room Therapy, which is a European Technology available all over the world for the last 30 Years. Following are the specific objections I want to bring to your notice. 1. Salzpa is claiming that ""'They are the Founders of the Salt room therapy"" in the Advertisement, which is totally wrong and against the facts and completely misleading the public. According to me the Company Salzpa is formed in less than a year and their Bangalore Operation, which is their first clinic only started just two weeks back. This ""Founder of Salt Room Therapy"" claim is totally baseless, I am asking for a proper evidence on this claim and request you to take action against them to curb these kind of advertisement campaigns in future. 2. Salzpa is claiming that ""Under the Guidance of Prof. Alina Chervinskaya. MD. Ph.D"" . Prof Alina Chervinskaya is a Russian Doctor practising in Moscow and had published clinical studies on Salt room therapy, which is available in Public domain and used all over the world for treating Salt room therapy patients. our question is "" What is the evidence that Salzpa is associated with Prof. Alina Chervinskaya"" , ""How can they get involved for a patient getting treated in Salzpa Bangalore"", ""Are they going to refer each and every patient they are treating to Prof. Alina Chervinskaya"" . They are using the name of a Doctor did research on this subject for canvassing patients without the direct involvement in the patient care and treatment. So I kindly request you to get into the details of this complaint of mine and take appropriate action against Salzpa, Bangalore to curb these kind of misleading advertisements.” "

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. The Advertiser argues that Prof Alina Chervinskaya is the founder director in Halomed and they are their distributors in western & southern India through an agreement contract. They derive their right and permission to use the name of Prof Alina Chervinskaya from this agreement. The whole purpose of mentioning the name of Prof. Alina Chervinskaya is to clarify that in case of any requirement, they would take appropriate steps to consult the Professor as the need be. The CCC noted that the advertisement headline states “Breathe a new life with the founders of Salt Room Therapy (Under the guidance of Prof. Alina V. Chervinskaya, M.D. Ph.D)”, thereby giving an impression that the treatment would be with active participation from Dr Alina whereas this is not the case. The CCC concluded that the claim was not substantiated and is misleading by ambiguity. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY: "Play Games24x7 Private Limited "
PRODUCT: "rummycircle.com"

COMPLAINT:

“They are using fake profiles to attract and wants to addict the people.” Advertiser’s Response: “This is further to our meeting on 25.04.2016. As we mentioned in our initial response dated 25.04.2016, we would like to re-affirm that all images and testimonials used by us in the reported advertisements provided together with the complaint are given by our registered customers. All these registered customers on our website have submitted their testimonials to us. For authenticating this at your end, you may reach out to all these customers at the below mentioned contact details provided by them. In order to further confirm the above, we are also enclosing a certificate issued by our statutory auditors who have inspected our database and have confirmed the identity of these customers together with their contact information. Kindly, note that the information of our customers constitutes confidential information and is protected under the Privacy Policy of our company in terms of the Information Technology (Reasonable Security Practices and Procedures and Sensitive Personal Data or Information) Rules 2011. We request you that such personally identifiable information of our users as stated above may not be publicly disseminated except in accordance with the applicable rules and laws.

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

"The advertiser representatives were given personal hearing by ASCI. The CCC viewed the website advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. As claim support data, Advertiser submitted the details of seven registered customers who appeared in their advertisements providing testimonials. ASCI Secretariat verified the details with a couple of customers as per the list provided by the advertiser and found discrepancy in the details. The mobile number provided by the Advertiser for customer #3 was non-functional. For customer # 5, there was a mis-match of the gender of the person and name. Also customer # 5 claimed to have lost money via Rummy circle and amount won in recent times (two months ago) was only Rs. 2000/- via Rummy Circle, whereas the advertisement claims that he has won Rs. 15,000/-. Based on these observations and discrepancies noted, the CCC concluded that some of the profiles used in the advertisement are false and misleading. The Website advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY:"Hindustan Unilever Limited"
PRODUCT: "Dove Intense Repair"

COMPLAINT:

"We make so many promises to our hair…. Straightening? But you had promised no more damaging Love curls? But hadn’t you promised never to damage again? Highlights again? Wasn’t the last time supposed to be the last time? No more last times!!Dove – with one quarter moisturizing milk and keratin actives nourishes hair from within and gives unbeatable damage repair Dove intense repair – the promise of unbeatable damage repair” "

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"The said TVC starts by implying that the said product provides repair to damage resulting out of straightening, curling and highlighting hair. Then the TVC further states that the product provides unbeatable damage repair. The ad is portrayed so cleverly and in such an outright manner that it implies and misleads the consumer to think that there is no other hair care product in the world which can have better results. Limiting the tests to a majority of shampoos and conditioners is contradictory with the main claim “unbeatable”. It is impossible to believe that the advertiser has tested the said product versus “a majority of shampoos and conditioners” in the world, as stated in the disclaimer. We request the advertiser to provide valid scientific data to prove that the said product provides unbeatable damage repair from all damages and such data should be available against all the shampoos and conditioners in the world. The TVC clearly intends to create a false impression that the said product provides unbeatable repair to damage. The TVC and You Tube ad is a deliberate attempt to mislead the gullible consumers by claiming “unbeatable damage repair” as per ASCI Code for Self-Regulation.” "

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

"The claim support data provided by the advertiser was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC viewed the TVC and considered the Advertiser’s response as well as opinion of the Technical expert presented at the meeting. As claim support data, Advertiser submitted independent test reports. Advertiser also cited certificate from A.C. Nielson to indicate that their test covered a large number of shampoos to represent 90% of the products in the market. Results from hair breakage tests at BTRA show that Dove Intense repair treatment on hair switches produces least number of damaged hair. Advertiser has also qualified the claim with disclaimers. In absence of any technical data from the complainant to disprove the results, the CCC concluded that the claim, “Dove intense repair – the promise of unbeatable damage repair” was substantiated. The complaint was NOT UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY: "Flipkart Internet Private Limited "
PRODUCT:"Sansui 5 Star Split A/C"

COMPLAINT:

"Please go to google.co.in and type in the search box: ""kenstar 1 ton 5 star ac vs sansui 1 ton 5 star ac. At the bottom of the page you will see an ad by flipkart which says: ""Sansui AC @ Rs.19,990 - Sansui 1 Ton 5 Star Split AC‎ ” I've seen an ad online by Flipkart for SANSUI - 1ton 5 star split ac. Price mentioned by flipkart in advertisement is 19990 rs but when I clicked on the link I was redirected to Flipkart website wherein the price mentioned is 22490 rs. I've attached relevant screenshot for the same. "

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the website advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser argues that the advertisement published on Google does not belong to them. They further state that they suspect an unknown third party has unauthorizedly used their website link and has advertised on Google with wrong price. The advertiser produced correspondence with Google wherein a reference was made to the possibility of an “affiliate” placing the advertisement which the advertiser would investigate further. The CCC noted the advertiser’s response of the possibility of an “affiliate” posting the advertisement; However CCC also noted basis screenshot provided by the complainant that the ad directed the consumer to the advertiser’s website. The CCC concluded that website advertisement claim “Ad” against www.flipkart.com for price of “Sansui AC @ Rs.19,990/- - Sansui 1 Ton 5 Star Split AC" was false and grossly misleading. The website advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY:"Ratnasagar Herbals Pvt. Ltd."
PRODUCT: "Joy Pure Aloe Multi Benefit Body Lotion"

COMPLAINT:

"“anti-ageing” “anti-pollutant” “UV protection” “moisturizing, soothing, softening” "

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"“My objections are as follows: 1. Ad proclaims Beautiful by Nature One Aloe Vera, multi benefits- 6 active actions- moisturising, soothing, softening, anti-ageing, anti-pollutant, UV protection. 2. In small print it is explained that Joy Pure Aloe has been prepared with Aloe Vera full of many of the benefits that it gives your skin protection from 6 skin problems. Its 6 active actions with original Aloe properties keeps your skin soft, smooth and moisturized making you ever fresh, good looking and beautiful naturally. 3. None of the benefits have been tested on the companys product Pure Aloe multi benefit body lotion. They are only imagined as mentioned somewhere in the literature. 4. Company must provide actual test results of trials on affected people and results obtained mentioning the quantity of the product used and the period of usage. Just making all claims is to cheat and fool the consumer.” "

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

"Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The CCC noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date. The CCC viewed the print advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims, “anti-ageing” “anti-pollutant” and “UV protection” were not substantiated and were misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. The CCC considered the claim of “moisturizing, soothing, softening” to be generic to the product category and not objectionable. This complaint was NOT UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY:"Simplilearn Solutions Pvt Ltd. (Simplilearn.com) "
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

The advertisement claims that they are "World's largest Professional Certifications Company"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"Please substantiate this claim with proof."

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The CCC noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date. The CCC viewed the TVC. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, "World's largest Professional Certifications Company" was not substantiated and was grossly misleading. The TVC contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY:"Xiaomi Logistics"
PRODUCT:"Mi 5 & Redmi Note 3 "

COMPLAINT:

"Complaint No: 1 “Xiaomi India is advertising their redmi note 3 phone on their website and Facebook page inviting people for registration for fake flash sales. The product for which they are seeking registration goes out of stock in less than 3 seconds. They are annoying Indian customers with their fake flash sales.” URL: https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=1727655690782328&id=1495988390615727 Complaint No: 2 “Its regarding redmi note 3 32gb version, which is always out of stock they were promoting redmi note 3 32gb version on amazon but on sale date they removed it. and there are issues with delivery also. They are just fooling the people with huge registration, if they dont have the stock then please ask them to stop promoting the device. Hope you guys would respond to it URL:https://www.facebook.com/redmiindia” Complaint No: 3 “Xiaomi India company launched Redmi note 3 mobile in march 3rd and started sales from march 9th. commencing from that day every wednesday they are fake selling redmi note 3 32gb mobile as they are out of stock with in milli seconds of time, and they are also not describing how many units they had sold they just making customers frustrating by those ads that more stock will be available only dumping the left 16gb variants from china, and also they are making label behind box that made in India actually the whole parts exported from china. I was waiting for this mobile since january they said it was coming soon since from jan and they conducted explorers event. So its 3 months from the launch why cant they stock up the mobiles of 32gb, you can see in the comments of their posts by mi fans., and they said that 3 color variants are released and still now silver 32gb variant is not released this is so dishonest making us wait by their dishonest adveritsements. so please take action on them 1. How many units are they releasing on 32gb? 2. why they are not releasing silver variant of 32gb not yet? 3.How can they get OUTOF STOCK in milli seconds of 32gb variant how many van able to buy that? 4.Without stock why they are advertising and irritating customers? 5.they are using label Make in India but they are importing all the parts from china please take action on them” Complaint No.4: “The mi note 3 32gb ads They show phone in stock till 1:55 PM at 13 April when sell open in fractions of second it is out of stock they are playing with us so I request you to bang mi” Complaint 5: “flash sales policies of this chinese company regarding selling products is third class site is:- mi.com 1. its flash sale lasts up to 2 seconds 2. most of people not able to get product even after registrations 3.When people dont get devices they get depressed . And country people getting their time wastage due to waiting in flash sales again & again 5.this country people minds diverting from work and waiting again and again 6. may be due to lack of production capacity they are creating flash sales for marketing, giving a false image in media about product demand 7. people wasting time on social media and getting themselves depressed for not getting product 8.this may be a false sales to create demand” "

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The CCC noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date. The CCC viewed the website advertisement. The complainants have objected to the flash sale, questioning it’s genuinity as it lasted barely few seconds (two / three seconds) . In the absence of the comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim “Redmi Note 3, Gold/Silver/Dark Grey Flash Sale – Sale Opens at 2.00 pm, April 13” is false and grossly misleading. The website advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY:"Legal Edge Tutorials "
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"False comparison of the data given by legal edge Bhopal in City Dainik (Dainik Bhaskar) Bhopal 3rd Page Dated 29th March 2016 this institute is giving wrong information which can spoil career of many students. "

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The CCC noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date. The CCC viewed the print advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the comparative data of various criteria indicated in the print advertisement showing Legal Edge to be better than other similar institutes, is not substantiated and is misleading. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1, I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY:"Nisha Herbal Products"
PRODUCT:"Safrogel Cream"

COMPLAINT:

“This is about Safrogel cream being advertised on TV for increasing fairness. The ad says, a fair person is prominently seen among lakhs of people. I see this ad regularly on Saam TV channel during 1 to 1:30 pm episode. Pl investigate & help stop this false claim.”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the TVC and considered the Advertiser’s response. The CCC concluded that the TVC claim (in Marathi) “Gori Gori Laakhat Bhaari, Nisha Herbal cha Safrogel Gori panaacha maha mantra” conveys that fair complexion is an enabler to become popular and derides people with darker complexion by implication. The TVC contravened Chapter III. 1 (b) and the ASCI Guidelines of Advertising for Skin Lightening or Fairness Improvement Products (“Advertising should not communicate any discrimination as a result of skin colour.”). The complaint was UPHELD. "

 
 

COMPANY: "Emami Limited"
PRODUCT: "Navratna Tel"

COMPLAINT:

“Sirf Do Minute Navratna Tail Ki Thandi Maalish Dinbhar Ke Sardard, Tension, Thakaan Ko Jhat Se Bhagaye”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

“2 min mai tension bhagaye, thakaanmithaye, sardardbhagaye, Anindra se chutkaradilaye. I bought this by seeing this ad by Amitabh Bachan but nothing happened complete fake. They are making fool by showing pictures and promising words which they are not fulfilling. This must be banned they are looting money.”

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. The claim support data was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response as well as opinion of the Technical expert presented at the meeting. Advertiser submitted market survey data as well as Clinical study report (Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAM-A scale), as claim support. The data provided based on market survey is indicative of possible effects. The CCC acknowledged that Simple hair oil massage is traditionally used for relief and relaxation. However, the definitive effect in two minutes is not adequately substantiated except for subjective parameters about ‘feel’ of the product. Data provided based on subjective ‘feel’ parameters are not adequate to substantiate the specific claims. There was no data to support the effectiveness with the absorption and reach of the product in two minutes to provide specific benefits as for anxiety, stress, headache and sleep induction. The Hamilton Anxiety Scale data was relevant for a 28 days use; however, it does not adequately support the specific claim of effect in 2 minutes. The CCC noted that the claimed benefit of efficacy in two minutes i.e., “Sirf Do Minute Navratna Tail Ki Thandi Maalish Dinbhar Ke Sardard, Tension, Thakaan Ko Jhat Se Bhagaye” “2 min mai tension bhagaye, thakaan mithaye, sardard bhagaye, Anindra se chutkara dilaye”, were not adequately substantiated and were misleading by ambiguity. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "AM.P Pan Products Pvt. Ltd "
PRODUCT: "Dabangg Pan Masala"

COMPLAINT:

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

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date. The CCC viewed the TVC and noted that the TVC features Jimmy Shergil – a celebrity from the field of cinema for a product which has a health warning “Pan Masala is injurious to health” and which cannot be purchased or used by minors. The CCC concluded that minors are very likely to be exposed to the Ad. The celebrity in the advertisement would have a significant influence on minors who are likely to emulate the celebrity in using the product. The TVC contravened Chapter III.2 (e) of the ASCI Code which specifically states that Advertisements “Should not feature personalities from the field of sports and entertainment for products which, by law, require a health warning such as “………….. is injurious to health” in their advertising or packaging. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY: "Maruti Suzuki India Ltd"
PRODUCT: "Alto"

COMPLAINT:

“India ki Pehli sawaari”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"The claim that Maruti Suzuki Alto is India ki pehli sawari needs substantiation from independent research. Is there data to prove that Alto is the first car purchased by Indians? If not then the claim is misleading by exaggeration "

RECOMMENDATION:NOT UPHELD

""The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The CCC noted that no specific claim support response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date. The advertiser sought an extension of four weeks to respond to the complaint which was declined by ASCI as the complaints are required to be processed in a time bound manner. The advertiser submitted their response in which they state that their claim is based on the data of SIAM (Society of India Automobile Manufacturers) Reports and this data is readily available in the public domain for reference. The advertiser also demanded that the complainant is required to substantiate their allegations to seek more details from the advertiser. The CCC viewed the TVC and the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. In the context of the advertisement presenting Maruti Suzuki as a brand with “Way of Life” tagline, the CCC concluded that the claim “India ki Pehli sawaari” indicating “30 lakh families and growing” for Alto, is a creative visualisation. The TV advertisement has a qualifier to provide a reference point for readers “India’s largest selling car for the last 10 years”. The complaint was NOT UPHELD. " "

 

COMPANY: "Amazon.com,Inc"
PRODUCT:"Amazon Kindle"

COMPLAINT:

“Unlimited Reading”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"The advertisement of Kindle Unlimited at Amazon.in communicates that unlimited books can be read after purchasing the subscription. And I subscribed for One month of unlimited option, but I found that 11th book cannot be bought of Kindle Unlimited edition and only a maximum 10 books can be read or if you want 11th book in your library its not possible until you return one book, this is clearly misguiding the customer and enticing them to buy the unlimited option without giving the fine details that only 10 books can be had at any point of time. Please note that they advertise on the website about unlimited free listed books if one subscribes for the Kindle Unlimited Service but actually if you buy the subscription you get only 10 books at a time and one of them has to be returned if you want a new one. Which essentially means only 10 books against the advertisement on the site of unlimited books. May be the fine print mentions the same but no one reads the fine print and there is no conditions apply or asterisk which can lead one to the fine print if so desired "

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The CCC noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date. The CCC viewed the website advertisement and reviewed the details of the complaint. The complainant explains that subscription promises “unlimited” reading; however, there is a cap on the number of books permitted under the scheme i.e. you get only 10 books at a time and one of them has to be returned if you want a new one which essentially means only 10 books against the advertisement on the site of unlimited books. The CCC noted that the advertisement does not have any disclaimers as well. The limit of ten books cannot be considered as an “unlimited” offer. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim “Unlimited Reading”, is not substantiated and is grossly misleading. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY: "Baby Marine Seafood Retail Pvt Ltd. "
PRODUCT: "Daily Fish"

COMPLAINT:

"‘No Preservatives” “No Added Chemicals” “100% Healthy” "

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

“This is the new brand of packaged fish launched in Kerala. They claim to be No Added Chemicals and no preservatives. No mention of the ppm allowed vs actual on the packaging. And hoardings about the same is misleading the consumers. What chemicals are actually there which is making them claim “No Added Chemicals". Also it is affecting the small fish vendors by indirectly claiming that the fish sold them is not good to consume. Request your good offices to investigate and take necessary action. They continue to fool customers with paper ads now”

RECOMMENDATION:NOT UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the print advertisement, Ad-Hoarding and product packaging and considered the Advertiser’s response. The advertiser states that their products have no added chemicals and preservatives and preservation technique is purely freezing which does not includes any addition of preservatives/chemicals. Also in their communication they do not mention that fish sold by small fish vendors are not good to consume. The CCC concluded that the claims, “No Preservatives”, “No Added Chemicals”, “100% Healthy” were not objectionable. The complaint was NOT UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY: "GAIA Range of Health Foods and Nutritional Supplements "
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"Gaia’s range of health foods and nutritional supplements helps you manage your weight more effectively.” "

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"“This is to bring to your kind notice that a company named ""GAIA"" is making various health claims in their advertisements. I am reluctant to buy their products as i am not not very sure as to on what basis they are making such claims and how true and fair their claims are. As per my limited knowledge, a company needs to have a basis before making any claim on their packages which are being offered to consumers for consumption. I am attaching herewith the copy of the advertisement for your perusal and reference.” "

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser states that the claim are made on the strength of the ingredients used in their products that have proven, time-tested and widely acknowledged health benefits. Advertiser did not provide any quantitative information of the added ingredients or any proof of efficacy for the product in support of the claim. The CCC noted that the product being advertised are not any special category of health food or supplements but are common food item such as oats and cookies etc. The CCC concluded that the claim, “Gaia’s range of health foods and nutritional supplements helps you manage your weight more effectively”, was not substantiated with any scientific evidence and is misleading. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY: "Britannia Industries Ltd"
PRODUCT: "Britannia Whole Wheat Bread"

COMPLAINT:

“100% Whole Wheat Bread”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"Need to bring to your notice regarding the Britannia advertising regarding its whole wheat bread as 100% whole wheat whereas in ingredients, it is written whole wheat flour 62% which is self-contradictory. The Company is advertising its bread as 100% whole wheat on the wrapper/pack, whereas the whole wheat flour is just 62% which is apparently misleading. The Council may kindly enquire regarding this and seek cogent clarification for this by the Company..... The pic of wrapper and ingredients is posted herewith. "

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the contents of the product packaging and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser argues that ‘Bread’ is a bakery product which is typically made from wheat flour (50-65%) and other ingredients like water, salt, yeast and small quantities of any other optional ingredients. They further state that since bread is manufactured with “100% Whole Wheat Flour” with 0% Maida, the name on the product is justified. No quantitative details of the product were furnished by the advertiser. The CCC noted that the back of the pack, has a declaration “Milled from 100% whole grain of wheat” whereas the front of pack has a claim “100% Whole Wheat Bread”. The Whole Wheat content in the product is in the range of 50% to 65% and other solid content in the product is coming from other sources. In view of these observations, the CCC concluded that the claim of “100% Whole Wheat Bread” on front of pack is misleading by ambiguity. The claim on the pack contravened Chapter I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY: "Patanjali Ayurved Ltd "
PRODUCT: "Patanjali Kachi Ghani Mustard Oil"

COMPLAINT:

“In this ad the presenter use help of govt. Policy and criticize other product. I have two complain. No edible oil available @ 30 to 40 rupees per liter to consumer in Indian market. 2. If I am selling palm oil after fulfilling govt. Rules no one have to criticize it.”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the TVC and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser argues, that the Company has the discretion to decide the cost of their own product. The CCC noted that the advertisement makes a sweeping statement that majority products in the market are adulterated with addition of cheap palm oil. The CCC concluded that there is no authentic evidence to support this statement and the advertisement is misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement also unfairly denigrates other oil products calling them as cheap adulterants. The TVC contravened Chapters I.1, I.4 and IV (e) of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Patanjali Ayurved Ltd "
PRODUCT: "Patanjali Jeera Biscuit"

COMPLAINT:

"1. 100 percent Atta. 2. Cholesterol Free. 3. Low Sodium Salt. 4. Benefits of Jeera, rich in iron Increase hemoglobin and help in acidity and other stomach related problems. "

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"Our Objections 1. The claim 100 percent atta is made. Does it mean only wheat flour is used and no maida. Pl. explain. 2. What is low sodium salt. Pl. explain. 3. The pack shows several benefits of jeera. But is jeera present in such a quantity that it deliver these benefits. This needs to be substantiated. 4. Also the process of making the bites may take away all the nutrition of jeera making it ineffective to give the mentioned benefits. 5. Promoting the product to be healthy because of the presence of jeera is misleading because the snack itself may not be very healthy. 6. Claims 1-4 are not substantiated with independent research data.” "

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the product packaging and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser argues, they have the FSSAI certificate and the wrapper mentions the dietary fiber is 1 gram per serving. They further assert that jeera bites are made up of atta and not maida and they add low sodium salt in the product. The CCC concluded – Claim - “100 percent Atta, cholesterol free, low Sodium salt”, is not substantiated and is misleading by ambiguity as the Advertiser did not provide any quantitative declaration of the various ingredients used in the manufacturing of the product. Advertiser did not provide any evidence to prove that Tata Salt is being used as Raw Material. There was no rationale provided for the claim Cholesterol free. The pack claim contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. This complaint was UPHELD. Claim – “Benefits of Jeera” - While CCC acknowledged that Jeera (cumin) has benefits as a single ingredient, it’s presence in the product was not substantiated to signify its quantity in the product. Also presentation of these claims on the packaging material (rich in iron Increase hemoglobin and help in acidity and other stomach related problems) was misleading by implication that the product Jeera biscuit would provide those benefit. The CCC did not consider the reference of Ayurvedic Pharmacopoeia or Schedule K provided by the advertiser relevant for this product classified as a “food” product. The pack claims contravened Chapter I.4 of the ASCI Code. This complaint was UPHELD. The pack did not have a claim of the product being healthy. This complaint was NOT UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY: "Sri Sri Ayurveda Trust "
PRODUCT: "Ojasvita Health Drink"

COMPLAINT:

“Often what’s tasty is not healthy, and what’s healthy is not tasty. Ojasvita is the ultimate combination of good health and great taste. Ojasvita’s 7 Power Herbs support your daily mental fitness needs, while its awesome new taste delights you!”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

“The advertisement on art of living YouTube account showcases a child being stopped from choosing or eating food options which the mother considers unhealthy. Then he goes to a shopping mall and there he gets ojasvita health supplement drink from a volunteer counter and the mother agree on that. The voice over explains that this drink has health and taste both and there good for the child. It claims health benefits, fit body, sharp mind with no information on serving portions and sugar contents. We have also seen an advertisement in newspapers on 30th March 2016. This advertisement by Sri Sri Nature foods is misleading as it gives no information on the percentage of sugar in the drink and claims a highly processed food supplement as natural, which it is not. The age group it targets is children. The pack of the product and commercial does not give clear information on the servings of drinks which is half information. We researched and checked the label of ojasvita and found out it has 41.9 gram sugar per 100 grams. It means it’s almost 42% sugar. Sugar is addictive and high intake can lead to or put higher risks of several health implications like diabetes, heart ailments and hypertension in children. WHO also recommends reduced intake of free sugars throughout the life course. In both adults and children WHO recommends reducing the intake of sugar to less than 10% of total energy intake. This commercial by providing partial info. Is misleading consumers by putting their children's health at stake. This product also claims health, wellness, fit body and mind with no scientific grounds. How can a product with added flavours, preservatives and high sugar can claim to be healthy?? Please take suitable action in public interest.”

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing and submitted their written response. The Advertiser was provided an opportunity to discuss their submission via tele-conferencing as well. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser argues, that Product is enriched with seven herbs like Ashwagandha , Brahmi , Bringaraj, satavari, S.Shankapushpi, Jyothismathi, Kalimusali which have proven health benefits. They confirmed in the telecon that it is an Ayurvedic Product. The CCC noted that while the advertiser asserts to have seven ayurvedic ingredients, no evidence was provided to indicate their content in the product and any technical rationale or clinical evidence to substantiate the claim of the product supporting “daily mental fitness needs” by virtue of these ingredients. The CCC concluded that the claim, “Ojasvita’s 7 Power Herbs support your daily mental fitness needs” is not substantiated and is misleading. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. The CCC did not consider the statement “Often what’s tasty is not healthy, and what’s healthy is not tasty.” Or complainant’s objection regarding absence of information regarding sugar content in the product to be objectionable. This complaint was NOT UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY: "Acrysil Ltd "
PRODUCT: "Carysil-Jive 60 Cm 1000 m3/h Chimney"

COMPLAINT:

“1000m3/hr Air flow”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"This Company is Selling Kitchen appliances online. Where they are clearly giving specifications of the products. Likewise they on shopclues, snapdeal, pepperfry. They are showing chimneys models as below: Jive 60 --1000m3/hr Air flow. As per my knowledge I went and studied these products thoroughly. And found that the air flow is very less .I have attached laboratory tests also. This company is selling lots chimneys with wrong description of air flow. I have also mailed this company before, but no response is been given till date. I am sure this company is providing exact specifications in different models also. And moreover they are Using CE Certified /sticker in the chimneys. These people are clearly fooling around and cheating people on large scale. It is my request to you to kindly initiate in this matter and do justice to People. "

RECOMMENDATION:NOT UPHELD

"The advertiser representative was given personal hearing by ASCI. The CCC viewed the website advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response for Review. As claim support data, the advertiser provided a copy of test certificate report of NABL approved laboratory showing result of 1024.147 m3/hr in addition to an inhouse test report submittted earlier. The advertiser also informed ASCI that the test report by the complainant can not be relied on in absence of a confirmation from the test laboratory that the tested product was not tampered with. Based on the data available on this complaint, the CCC concluded that the Carysil-Jive 60 chimney model claiming “1000m3/hr Air flow”, was substantiated. The complaint is Not Upheld on Review. "

 

COMPANY: "Acrysil Ltd"
PRODUCT: "Carysil-Stomp 60-1000 m3/h Chimney"

COMPLAINT:

"This Company is Selling Kitchen appliances online. Where they are Clearly giving specifications of the products. Likewise they on shopclues, snapdeal, pepperfry. They are showing chimneys models as below: STOMP 60 --1000m3/hr Air flow. As per my knowledge I went and studied these products thoroughly. And found that the air flow is very less. I have attached laboratory tests also. This company is selling lots chimneys with wrong description of air flow. I have also mailed this company before, but no response is been given till date. I am sure this company is providing exact specifications in different models also. And moreover they are Usin CE Certified /sticker in the chimneys. These people are clearly fooling around and cheating people on large scale. It is my request to you To kindly initiate in this matter and do justice to People. "

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

RECOMMENDATION:NOT UPHELD

 

"The advertiser representative was given personal hearing by ASCI. The CCC viewed the website advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response for Review. As claim support data, the advertiser provided a copy of test certificate report of NABL approved laboratory showing result of 1033.438 m3/hr in addition to an inhouse test report submittted earlier. The advertiser also informed ASCI that the test report by the complainant can not be relied on in absence of a confirmation from the test laboratory that the tested product was not tampered with. Based on the data available on this complaint, the CCC concluded that the Carysil-Jive 60 chimney model claiming “1000m3/hr Air flow”, was substantiated. The complaint is Not Upheld on Review. "

 

COMPANY: "Bhaskar Venkatesh Products Pvt Ltd "
PRODUCT: "Bhaskar Salt"

COMPLAINT:

“Blood Pressure!”, “Acidity!”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"Digital copy of the advertisement is attached. URL: http://epaper.bhaskar.com/Khandwa/162/06032016/mpcg/1/ It is supposed to be a salt which will take care of Blood Pressure and acidity. Id does not mention anything about the sodium factor (which contributes to high blood pressure) or the factor which contributes to acidity. Taking cue from genuine salts like Tata Lite, the advertisement is misleading people and indulging in fraudulent business. "

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

"The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. However, in the absence of a response prior to the due date, the matter was examined by the CCC on the basis of the information available then and an exparte decision was taken. On receiving ASCI’s communication requesting confirmation of compliance with the CCC recommendation, the advertiser responded with their comments. ASCI accepted their response to review the CCC recommendation. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser argues that the complete advertisement (as translated in English) should be read as, “Blood Pressure & Acidity, No need to worry, Eat less Salt, Eat good Salt”. Their advertisement conveys not to eat more salt. The advertiser did not explain what the benefits of good salt i.e. “accha namak” are or substantiate the benefits of the advertised product. The CCC concluded that in the context of the advertisement, the reference to “No need to worry” read in conjunction with the mention of “bood pressure, acidity” further recommending “eat Bhaskar salt” was misleading, by implication. The advertisement implies that Bhaskar salt is safe even in case of blood pressure and acidity. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The decision of complaint being Upheld stands on Review. "

 

COMPANY: "Bharti Airtel Ltd (Airtel) "
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“Stream Videos 26% faster”, “8% more battery life”, “India’s first and only 4G LTE network”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"“Airtel claims their network stream YouTube videos 26% faster, n gives 8% extra battery life, n India's only 4G LTE network. Asci already reply to me on my past complaint, this Airtel 26% fast streaming a extra 8% battery life is misleading but still airtel not removed it from their website. In India airtel is not only 4G LTE network. idea, Vodafone, uninor, reliance jio also 4G LTE networks in India.” "

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. The claim support data was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC viewed the website/internet advertisements and considered the Advertiser’s response as well as opinion of the Technical expert presented at the meeting. Claim – “Streams You Tube videos 26% faster” This claim appears with the disclaimer ""Applicable for time taken to access videos on You Tube"". Advertiser provided test reports from M/s Phi Metrics Technologies and M/s Metro. The CCC noted that these tests relate to the initial access of the video only and not for loading/viewing the entire video. According to the Phi Metrics Technologies report, Airtel accessed a test You Tube video in 10.7 seconds whereas the next best operator (unnamed in the report) did it in 10.8 seconds. This result does not support the claim of 26% made by the advertiser. According to the other report from Metro report Airtel loads You Tube videos (i.e. accesses them) 35% faster as compared to other operators, but the test covered only ten non-metro cities. There is no data/clarification/example as to the basis of the calculation of 35%. The claim, “Streams You tube videos 26% faster”, was not substantiated and is misleading and contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. This complaint was UPHELD. Claim - “8% extra battery life” This claim appears with the disclaimer ""Applicable for heavy internet and video application users”. The advertiser provided a test report of a benchmarking study undertaken by Phi Metrics Technologies covering 10 cities in India to check the smartphone battery performance across ""other"" operators under these conditions. Their report rates Airtel as the network that gives more than 8% higher battery life as compared to ""other"" operators in four metros. The test methodology was not given in the report, nor was there any data comparing with ""other"" operators, nor was the basis of the calculation of 8% provided. The claim, “8% extra battery life”, was not adequately substantiated and is misleading and contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. This complaint was UPHELD. The CCC noted the Advertiser’s response that the claim, “India’s first and only 4G LTE network”, has been deleted from the Website. The claim “India’s only…” was not factual and was considered to be misleading and contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. This complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY: "Dabur India Ltd"
PRODUCT:"Odonil Nature-1 Touch Air Sanitizer"

COMPLAINT:

"My objections are as follows: 1. Ad introduces for the first time Odonil Nature -1 Touch Air Sanitizer, called by the company + Air Doctor. The bold catch line says Air as pure as your love (our) guarantee for germ-free air in your home for your children. The graphic presentation of the product pack says 1 refill worth Rs. 75/- free kills germs. On the right side in very small print it says for the Germ- free Air in the catch line kills the germs present in air in an enclosure (room) of 216 cubic feet with only one spray testing and checking done by a standard laboratory. For more information log on to www.odonil.com. 2. A pictoral presentation of child and mother shows the happy mood on the faces of both in a childs room, a cot with bed and round pillows in the background. It is a Dabur Odonil product. 3. The guaranteed germ free air is tested in an enclosure of 216 cubic feet with 1 spray of the product. Even if it is a childs room, there are standards laid down by the municipality of buildings and minimum area a room even bathroom should occupy. Even at a height of 8 ft for ceiling from floor, the 216 cubic feet gives only 27 sq ft, are of the enclosure which could be 9X3 ft, or 6.75 X4ft.- which seems to be too small for a childs room. The assumption of 216 cubic feet is arbitrary. Again one spray may kill germs present, but then it is a static condition, while for healthy living it has to be dynamic condition and air has to be replaced with fresh air. This kind of testing and calling it guaranteed germ free air is to fool the consumer. Let the company say- It is an air sanitizer, without any promise or guarantee of killing germs in 1 spray. Let the consume have the option to use it as and when he needs. 4. First Time introduction is also misnomer, because many kinds of sanitizers are available in the market, one particularly popular is the product used inside cars. So it cannot be the first time, may be it could be the first time from Dabur Odonil, but not in the general market.” "

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. The claim support data was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response as well as opinion of the Technical expert presented at the meeting. As claim support data, the Advertiser provided Germ Kill Evaluation Studies and test reports with both, in vitro study as well as in the room study. These results showed that Odonil 1 Touch Freshener has a fairly broad spectrum of activity and can reduce bacteria. The data shows efficacy of 10, 20 and 30 sprays in a chamber with listed dimensions (216 cubic ft). Although the results submitted show reduction in the number of microorganisms, it is with 10 sprays and not with one spray or one touch as is claimed. The CCC also opined that in a real life situation, it is not possible to have “germ free” air at home with the product as the test has certain limitations (e.g room size etc.). The CCC concluded that the claims (in Gujarati) as translated in English, “First time” ,“Guarantee of germ free* air in your home for your children”, were not substantiated and are misleading by exaggeration and implication. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY: "Siddha Vaseekarna Kavacham "
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“If you wear or keep “Siddha vaseekarana kavacham” (activated Hypnosis Armor), People like Hard-hearted husband and wife, boy friend and girlfriend, Government officials, business men, customers will act as your choice. For Business development, Conquers enemies (wins from enemies), winning from court cases, success in exams, for desired vehicle, love and for romantic relationships, Bring the powerful “Siddha vaseekarana kavacham” (activated Hypnosis Armor) for only Rs.525/ - to your home to fulfill all your wishes. You can pay after delivery is taken.”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the concerned Media (Andhra Jyoti) for their assistance in providing the contact details of the advertiser, or to forward the grievances of the complainant to the advertiser. The CCC noted that no response was received from the advertiser or from the concerned media prior to the due date. The CCC viewed the print advertisement. In the absence of response from the concerned media and comments from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims in the advertisement (in Kannada) as translated in English, “If you wear or keep “Siddha vaseekarana kavacham” (activated Hypnosis Armor), people like Hard-hearted husband and wife, boy friend and girlfriend, Government officials, business men, customers will act as your choice. For Business development, Conquers enemies (wins from enemies), winning from court cases, success in exams, for desired vehicle, love and for romantic relationships, Bring the powerful “Siddha vaseekarana kavacham” (activated Hypnosis Armor) for only Rs.525/ - to your home to fulfill all your wishes”, were not substantiated and are misleading by exaggeration. Also, the advertisement exploits the consumers’ lack of knowledge and is likely to lead to grave or widespread disappointment in the minds of consumers. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1, I.4 and I.5 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY: "Patanjali Ayurved Ltd "
PRODUCT: "Divya Swasari Pravahi "

COMPLAINT:

“Thousands of banned medicines are being sold in the market. The harmful results of these bad chemicals are surfacing now. Thousands of pharmaceutical companies are paying crores of rupees as a fine for this act. Besides this, health of people is getting affected by these chemicals.”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"The advertisement of of “Patanjali Ayurved Ltd.’s – Divya Swasari Pravahi”, Is about a Cough Syrup. The Whole Claim Is So Outlandish, Blatant Lies. To Give Bad Name To Other Products Just For The Same Of Pushing One's Own, Is Bad In Principles."

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser states that the advertisement has not quoted any competitor’s name and their intent is to create awareness against chemicals and emphasising on use of herbal / ayurveda products. Advertiser did not provide any clinical evidence or proof of efficacy for the product in support of the claims. The CCC concluded that the claims, “Thousands of banned medicines are being sold in the market. The harmful results of these bad chemicals are surfacing now. Thousands of pharmaceutical companies are paying crores of rupees as a fine for this act. Besides this, health of people is getting affected by these chemicals”, were factually incorrect and not substantiated with authentic supporting data and are misleading. Also, the claims are denigrating competition and puts the entire allopathic cough and cold medicine category in bad light. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1, I.4 and IV.1(e) of the ASCI Code. This complaint was UPHELD. The claim regarding, Divya Pharmacy Ayurvedic medicines i.e. “These medicines have 0% side effects and 100% results”, was not substantiated and is misleading. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. This complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY: "Patanjali Ayurved Ltd "
PRODUCT: "Obesity-Free Information Camp - Divya Mukta Vati & Divya Madhunashini Vati"

COMPLAINT:

"• “Conducting Trials On Over 1 Cr People” • ""It Gives Strength To Pancreas & Naturally Controls Diabetes “ • “It Also Controls The Most Dangerous Side Effects Of Diabetes Like Neuropathy, Nephropathy & Retinopathy.” "

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"“The advertisement of “Patanjali Ayurved Ltd.’s – Obesity-Free Information Camp - Divya Mukta Vati & Divya Madhunashini Vati” Is About "" Obesity - Free Information Camp "" & 2 If Its Products . Ad Reads , 1) "" After An Intense Research Of 25 Years & Conducting Tests On Over 1 Crore People ........ 2)About Its Product It says , "" a) It Gives Strength To Pancreas & Naturally Controls Diabetes . b) It Also Controls The Most Dangerous Side Effects Of Diabetes Like Neuropathy, Nephropathy & Retinopathy.” This is An Outrageous Claim To Make . Conducting Trials On Over 1 Cr People Is Unheard Of. And Have They Conducted Double Blind Randomized Controlled Trials To Prove Their Outlandish Claims About. If So Let Them Show The Data” "

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and replied that they require one weeks time to respond. No data was submitted by the advertiser in the subsequent week. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s reply. In the absence of specific comments prior to the due date of the meeting, the CCC concluded that the claims, “Conducting Trials On Over 1 Cr People”, "It Gives Strength To Pancreas & Naturally Controls Diabetes”, “It Also Controls The Most Dangerous Side Effects Of Diabetes Like Neuropathy, Nephropathy & Retinopathy”, were not substantiated and are misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY:"Amazon.com, Inc (Friendly Customer Service) "
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"Customer friendly services titled showing a van in muddy road, a student in the class, and a scooterist run out of fuel being assisted. The last one of a scooterist out of fuel being towed in by another scooterist with his left leg and giving a final push to the petrol bunk is a safety risk. It also shows a violation of a motor vehicle being run without it's fuel. The best would have been to show another vehicle transporting the scooter without fuel, even if it was a bullock cart. Friendliness needs to be without risking both and appreciative of it being done without any returns in expectation. Other way the helping scooterist could have been shown to have gone and returned from the petrol bunk carrying the petrol for the affected scooter. "

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date. The CCC viewed the TVC and concluded that the last scene showing “a scooterist out of fuel being towed by another scooterist with his left leg and giving a final push towards the petrol punp”, shows and encourages a dangerous practice without justifiable reason, and manifests a disregard for safety and encourages negligence. This part of the TVC contravened Chapter III.3 of the ASCI Code as well as the ASCI Guidelines on advertisements depicting automotives. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY: "Ayurwin Pharmaceutical Pvt. Ltd "
PRODUCT: "Ayurwin Nutrigain+ Powder and Capsules "

COMPLAINT:

“This Summer Along With Strong Body, Keep Your Body Cool”, "Look Strong & Fit, Gain Your Body Weight"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"The Whole Language Is So Vague & There Is No Scientific Data To The Effect. Hence Misleading. "

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims, “This Summer Along With Strong Body, Keep Your Body Cool”, and "Look Strong & Fit, Gain Your Body Weight", were not substantiated and are misleading. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY: "Kbnows Society "
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“Earthquake resistant up to 9-10 Richter scale”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"Adv for flats in multistorey building, as earthquake resistant up to 9-10 Richter scale. False claim of a 20+ floor multistorey building can’t be earthquake resistant up to 9-10 Richter scale. "

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser stated that the structure of the building has been certified by the Ld. Consultants. As claim support data, the Advertiser provided a copy of the certificate issued by the consultant. The CCC noted that the report was not dated and nor did it refer to the said project being Earthquake resistant up to 9-10 on the Richter scale. Advertiser did not provide substantiation specific to this claim. The CCC concluded that the claim, “Earthquake resistant up to 9-10 Richter scale”, was not substantiated and is misleading. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY: "Speed Height Capsule "
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"“Good height makes career bright"", ""Effective Ayurvedic medicine"", ""Helps in physical development"" "

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

“I am doctor, this advt without address tel no claims Increase in Height of children. Endocrine manipulation only under qualified endo DM DOCTOR..THIS is unethical. Divyabhaskar Gujarati VADODARA edition Tuesday date 15 March 2016 page 18”

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the concerned Media (Divya Bhaskar) for their assistance in providing the contact details of the advertiser, or to forward the grievances of the complainant to the advertiser. The CCC noted that no response was received from the advertiser or from the concerned media prior to the due date. The CCC viewed the print advertisement. In the absence of response from the concerned media and comments from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims (in Gujarati) as translated in English, “Good height makes career bright”, “Speed Height™ Capsule - It can be beneficial for me also”, “Effective Ayurvedic medicine”, “Helps in physical development”, were not substantiated and are misleading. Also, specific to the claims implying increase in height, the advertisement is in Breach of the law as it violated The Drugs & Magic Remedies Act. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1, I.4 and III.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY: "AirAsia India Limited (Air Fair) "
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"Advertisement Claims That Air Fair From Chennai To Australia Is Available For 4999. Ideally The Ad Should Be Air Fair Available From 4999. This Is Misleading And Has Caused Unnecessary Stress And Waste Of Time While Searching For Tickets. "

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and replied that they require one week’s additional time to respond to the complaint. The CCC heard the radio spot and considered the Advertiser’s reply. The CCC concluded that the claim, “Air Fair from Chennai to Australia is available for 4999”, is false and misleading. The radio advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY: "Voltas Ltd"
PRODUCT:"Voltas All Star AC "

COMPLAINT:

“You can run two AC’s in cost of 1 AC”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

“This ad says TV time is family time & you can run two ACs in cost 1 AC. the ad claims that two ac will consume less power than one, I would like to know how can they make such a bold statement, without any support to the claim”

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. The claim support data was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC viewed the TVC and considered the Advertiser’s response as well as opinion of the Technical expert presented at the meeting. Advertiser stated that the proposition of ""Running 2 ACs at the Cost of 1 AC"" is based on the comparison between a Voltas All Star Inverter AC and a Conventional Start-Stop AC. As claim support data, the advertiser provided a test report from an independent test lab (Intertek) comparing the Voltas All Star AC, which is an inverted based 5-star-BEE product, against their own non-inverter 2-star-BEE product, for an 8-hour test run with a 2KW test load. The report showed that the 8-hour energy consumption for equivalent performance is 4.2 KWHr vs. 9.1 KWHr, thereby justifying the claim made in the TVC. However, the CCC concluded that the claim (in Hindi), “Ab ek ke kharche mein 2 AC chalaiye”, is misleading by omission of disclaimers giving reference to the comparison being made. The TVC contravened Chapter I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY: "Made Easy Institute (GATE, ESE & PSUs Exams) "
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"1) India's Best Institute for IES, GATE & PSUs 2) Aspirants can crack in first attempt with Made Easy 3) Best faculty, best study material, best results, best pool of faculty in India, best infrastructure & support and maximum selections with toppers 4) The ONLY institute which has consistently produced Toppers in ESE, GATE and PSUs 5) The results in ESE 2015 4 streams 4 first ranks, 38 selections in top 10, 350 selections out of total 434 vacancies 6) The results in GATE 2016 1st Ranks in ME, EE, EC, CS, IN & PI, 53 selections in top 10, 96 selections in top20 & 368 selections in top 100 "

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"There is no evidence and validation provided by Made Easy for all these claims made in their advertisement, so these claims may be misleading and fake. i) The claim of India's Best institute for IES, GATE & PSUs is misleading as on what parameters they are claiming to be the best. Do they have any comparative data of all other similar institutes or any third party validation or research to prove this claim? ii) Their claim of they have best faculty, best study material, best results, best pool of faculty in India, best infrastructure & support and maximum selections with toppers are completely vague claim. iii) They have claimed so many top ranks and over all results but have not provided any substantiation or validation by any independent body. All of these claims in Made Easy's advertisement appear to be misleading, vauge and fake. They are releasing such big advertisements to lure students to join them for the training and which can be dangerous as many of the genuine aspirants can fall for these fake claims and ruin their career without any success”. "

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. As claims support data, the Advertiser provided list of students who cracked in first attempt, list of awards and recognition given to them, comparative chart of various intra industry competitors, list of toppers, and list of study materials provided by them. However this data was considered to be assertion of the claims by the advertiser as no authentic comparitive data was provided by the advertiser. The CCC concluded that the claims, “India's Best Institute for IES, GATE & PSUs”, “Crack in 1st attempt”, “ Best faculty”, “Best study material”, “Best results”, “Best pool of faculty in India”, “Best infrastructure & support”, “Maximum selections with toppers”, “The ONLY institute which has consistently produced Toppers in ESE, GATE and PSUs”, “The results in ESE 2015 4 streams 4 first ranks, 38 selections in top 10, 350 selections out of total 434 vacancies”, “The results in GATE 2016 1st Ranks in ME, EE, EC, CS, IN & PI, 53 selections in top 10, 96 selections in top20 & 368 selections in top 100”, were not substantiated with authentic evidence. There was no validation by an independent third party for the claims as well. Also, the claims were considered to be misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY: "Hindustan Media Ventures Ltd "
PRODUCT: "Hindustan Hindi Newspaper "

COMPLAINT:

“Hindustan – Hindi shetra ka No. 1 Akbhar”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"They have made a false claim of being the No.1 newspaper in Hindi Region. The Hindi Region, for common understanding is largely North India where the dominant language spoken and read is Hindi. This includes states of UP, Uttarakhand, Bihar, Jharkhand, Punjab, Haryana, Chandigarh, Delhi, Jammu, Himachal, MP, Chhattisgarh and Rajasthan. However, Hindustan newspaper has created its own definition of Hindi Region or Hindi Kshetra and have selectively added their readership numbers of a few states to claim an unfair No.1 position in the Hindi Region. Hindustan has added numbers for UP, Uttarakhand, Bihar, Jharkhand, and Delhi and have termed these as Hindi Region or Hindi Kshetra .They have conveniently left out the other Hindi markets like Haryana, Punjab, Chandigarh, HP, Jammu, MP, Chhattisgarh and Rajasthan. However, the truth is that in the Hindi Region, that is commonly understood by Readers and Advertisers, Dainik Jagran is the No.1 newspaper. By selectively altering the definition of Hindi Region, Hindustan has made a false claim of being No.1 and are misleading both readers and advertisers. They should not be permitted to use the term Hindi Kshetra in their advertising and communications. I am attaching their communication for your reference, and also the Readership figures as per IRS for your reference.” "

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. The claim support data was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response as well as opinion of the Technical expert. Advertiser argues that the advertisement prominently disclosed the definition of Hindi Shetra/Cities which forms part of “Hindi Shetra” for the purpose of subject advertisement where the position of No.1 is claimed and is admittedly held by “Hindustan”. The CCC noted that taking mother tongue as well as language read and understood into account, MP, Rajasthan and Haryana are among the top 10 Hindi consuming markets and can not be ignored. The Hindi Kshetra markets as defined by the advertiser account for only half of the total market for Hindi dailies. The CCC observed that the Advertiser has selectively added their readership numbers of a few states to claim the No.1 position in the Hindi Region. The CCC concluded that the claim, “Hindustan – Hindi shetra ka No. 1 Akbhar” read in conjunction with the disclaimer, is false and misleading by implication. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY: "Hindustan Unilever Ltd "
PRODUCT:"Sunsilk Shampoo "

COMPLAINT:

“3 months mein lambe baal”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

“Sunsilk adv in the TOI on 20 Apr 16 3 months mein lambe baal The fine print is so fine that it cannot be read Misleading the consumer to only believe in the catch line Even billboards do not mention the fine print in the ad. The adv wants the consumer to believe that their hair will grow in three months Using their shampoo hair will naturally grow in three months if not cut So why mislead the consumer”

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. The claim support data was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response as well as opinion of the Technical expert presented at the meeting. Advertiser argues that the advertisement mentions that the product helps the hair to reach its natural growth potential of 4 cm in 3 months, which by way of a disclaimer, is clarified that the achieved result is through reduction of breakage. Advertiser provided an in-house test report in which breakage due to combing is reduced by use of the product. By virtue of reduced breakage, the advertiser claims, the ""natural potential"" of 4 cm growth in three months is restored. The claim is of ""longer hair"" whereas the test conducted is that of breakage. Not all hair break during combing, so the length of the remaining hair still retain the natural growth rate of 4 cm in three months and be longer. Therefore reducing the breakage during combing cannot increase hair length. Based on the above opinion, the CCC concluded that the claim, “3 months mein lambe baal”, was not substantiated and is misleading. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY: "PepsiCo India Holdings P. Ltd. "
PRODUCT:"Pepsi"

COMPLAINT:

"Har Bottle par Paytm Cash pakka."

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"This is with reference to the new Advertisements by PepsiCo, wherein viewers are told that buy a Happy Pepsi Bottle to win a chance to win a Strangler Ducati, or trip to Australia, by just sending a SMS with the code. Further the advertisement ends with the line that ""har Bottle pat Paytm Cash pakka."" The Advertisement is totally misleading as the offer of Paytm Cash of Rs. 20/- can be used for a maximum of 1 time per user. The advertisers by issuing this misleading advertisements are luring the innocent public to buy pepsi bottles, with a minimum hope of getting some cash back through Paytm. It is therefore in violation of Chapter 1 of the ASCI code of ""To ensure the truthfulness and honesty of representations and claims made by advertisements and to safeguard against misleading advertisements."" Please take cognizance of the same and take immediate action against Pepsi Co. as they have mislead lakhs of consumers to buy the Pepsi Bottle by luring them with false commitments. They Should Be Punished In Accordance With Law, And All Those Consumers Who Have Brought The Pepsi Bottle Should Be Compensated By The Offer, For Which They Had Been Lured To Buy. "

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. Advertiser argues that the Contest is subject to its terms and conditions which clearly provide that every participant can avail the offer of Paytm cash only once during the Contest period, and all subsequent attempts to avail the said offer from the same mobile number or same registered Paytm user ID with a different code or through different channels will be rejected. The CCC concluded that the claim in the TVC , "Har Bottle par Paytm Cash pakka”, is misleading and luring the consumers to buy pepsi bottles, with a minimum hope of getting some cash back through Paytm. The TVC itself does not clarify the main condition for the offer of it being mobile number specific. Also, the disclaimers in the advertisement were not in the same language as that of the voice over. The TVC contravened ASCI’s guidelines on Supers and Chapter I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY: "B. K. Shastri "
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"These ads contain words such as black magic, 'kiya karaya', vashikaran etc which means to harm any other person using black magic, or control other person's mind, make him love someone or hate someone. Punjab Kesri newspaper is printing ads related to black magic which is against anti-superstition Act. not one or two, this newspaper publish such ads on daily basis in various pages.See links Dated: 21 April 2016” "

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the concerned Media (Punjab Kesari) for their assistance in providing the contact details of the advertiser, or to forward the grievances of the complainant to the advertiser. The CCC noted that no response was received from the advertiser or from the concerned media prior to the due date. The CCC viewed the print advertisement. In the absence of response from the concerned media and comments from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims in the advertisement (in Hindi), “Astarekha, Janampatri, photo dikhakar fees shradhanusar kateen se kateen samasyaon ke samadhan hethu aaj hi mile. Shaadi, viza mein dheri, mata-pita manana, vidhesh se vapis bhulana, sautan/dushman chutkara, talaak, naukri, health, pati-patni mein aan ban, yadi aapka pati-premi, beta kisi ke vash mein hai toh ek baar avashya milen”, were not substantiated and are misleading by exaggeration. Also, the advertisement exploits the consumers’ lack of knowledge and is likely to lead to grave or widespread disappointment in the minds of consumers. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1, I.4 and I.5 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY: "Miya Faisal Khan Bangali "
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"These ads contain words such as black magic, 'kiya karaya', vashikaran etc which means to harm any other person using black magic, or control other person's mind, make him love someone or hate someone. Punjab Kesri newspaper is printing ads related to black magic which is against anti-superstition Act. not one or two, this newspaper publish such ads on daily basis in various pages.See links Dated: 21 April 2016” "

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"The ASCI approached the concerned Media (Punjab Kesari) for their assistance in providing the contact details of the advertiser, or to forward the grievances of the complainant to the advertiser. The CCC noted that no response was received from the advertiser or from the concerned media prior to the due date. The CCC viewed the print advertisement. In the absence of response from the concerned media and comments from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims in the advertisement (in Hindi), “dukon se na gabraoh, ek baar humein zaroor aajmaon”, “kaale hilam ruhaani hilam ke mahir”, “pati-patni mein aan ban, premi-premika vash mein karayein”, manchahi shaadi, kiya karaya mutkarni, vashikaran karvaein/tudvaein”, “specialist: sautan dushman se chutkara”, were not substantiated and are misleading by exaggeration. Also, the advertisement exploits the consumers’ lack of knowledge and is likely to lead to grave or widespread disappointment in the minds of consumers. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1, I.4 and I.5 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the concerned Media (Punjab Kesari) for their assistance in providing the contact details of the advertiser, or to forward the grievances of the complainant to the advertiser. The CCC noted that no response was received from the advertiser or from the concerned media prior to the due date. The CCC viewed the print advertisement. In the absence of response from the concerned media and comments from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims in the advertisement (in Hindi), “dukon se na gabraoh, ek baar humein zaroor aajmaon”, “kaale hilam ruhaani hilam ke mahir”, “pati-patni mein aan ban, premi-premika vash mein karayein”, manchahi shaadi, kiya karaya mutkarni, vashikaran karvaein/tudvaein”, “specialist: sautan dushman se chutkara”, were not substantiated and are misleading by exaggeration. Also, the advertisement exploits the consumers’ lack of knowledge and is likely to lead to grave or widespread disappointment in the minds of consumers. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1, I.4 and I.5 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY: "Astrologer – R K Shastri "
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"“These ads contain words such as black magic, 'kiya karaya', vashikaran etc which means to harm any other person using black magic, or control other person's mind, make him love someone or hate someone. Punjab Kesri newspaper is printing ads related to black magic which is against anti-superstition Act. not one or two, this newspaper publish such ads on daily basis in various pages. See links Dated: 21 April 2016” "

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the concerned Media (Punjab Kesari) for their assistance in providing the contact details of the advertiser, or to forward the grievances of the complainant to the advertiser. The CCC noted that no response was received from the advertiser or from the concerned media prior to the due date. The CCC viewed the print advertisement. In the absence of response from the concerned media and comments from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims in the advertisement (in Hindi), “Har samasya ka samadhan 100% guarantee se kiya jayega”, “shaadi mein dheri, pati-patni mein aan ban, vashikaran karvana/tudwana, sautan dushman se chutkara, aulad kahne mein na chalna, viza mein rukavat, vidhesh yatra, naukri mein tarakki, kiya karaya, nazardhosh, aneko samaysa ka turanth samadhan, pyar mein dhoka kaye stri purush ladke ladkiyan zaroor milein”, were not substantiated and are misleading by exaggeration. Also, the advertisement exploits the consumers’ lack of knowledge and is likely to lead to grave or widespread disappointment in the minds of consumers. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1, I.4 and I.5 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY: "ANI Technologies Pvt.Ltd "
PRODUCT: "OLA Cabs"

COMPLAINT:

“Ola Micro @ 6/km”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"Complaint 1- “OLA Cabs false campaign promising Rs. 6/km, with a very small foot print that is not visible to the human eye-is highly misleading; it costs an average of more than Rs. 12/km is the FACT. This campaign is by way of pamphlets, email, ads on hoarding etc. This type of cheating should be curved immediately to protect the interests of consumers.” Complaint 2- “Ola cabs - Micro cabs are advertised at lesser rates than actual. They put an * sign in boards but no declaration is given for that * in the whole board. Ola cabs is advertising its micro cabs at 6 Rs/km in many print display boards even at bus stops. There is an * sign but there is no declaration of this * sign in the whole ad. Actual cost of micro cabs is coming to around 14.5 Rs/km which is more than the double of the advertised price.” Complaint 3- “Ola Micro claims to be 6 Rs./Km, but they don't tell anything about other charges like base fare, duration charge, toll charge & others. They should explicitly mention their other charges which sums upto double of their advertised charges. So, the consumer takes cab thinking of just their advertised ads & gets cheated by other charges.” "

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date. The CCC viewed the Promotional material, Ad – Hoarding and the TVC. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “Ola Micro @ 6/km”, was not substantiated and is also misleading by omission of a disclaimer of other applicable additional charges. The promotional material, AdHoarding and the TVC contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaints were UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY: "Dr. Bhavana Shah Fitness Highway "
PRODUCT: "Fat Freeze "

COMPLAINT:

“8 Session of Tummy Tuck U-Lipo Rs. 20,000/-* FREE*”, “‘Fat Freeze More Advanced than U-Lipo”, “No Diet”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"Complaint 1- 1- The Advt claims that FREE. 8 SESSIONS OF TUMMY TUCK ULIPO RS 20000/- FREE. Gudi padwa offer. Dont miss. This claim gave me the impression that they are offering Rs 20000 worth of services Free on the occasion of Gudi Padwa and hence I called up the number given in the advt and reached to the the following address. Dr bhavna shah fitness highway. 202,2ND Floor, Emperor Building, Babhai Naka, Borivali (W), Mumbai-4000920 (India) 022-42419777 But when I went there, I was informed that the 8 Sessions of tummy tuck u lipo worth rs 20000 is not free and I have to buy services worth rs 60000, to get services worth rs 20000 free. Hence the advt was completely misleading and amounts to cheating & misrepresentation of the facts. 2- Also the Advt says Dr Bhavna Shah’s Fitness Highway and claims that Bhavna Shah is a Doctor. There is No Proof of this Claim. There is no mention of her degree in the advt, that she is doctor in which field like MBBS, BHMS, BAMS, BUMS etc etc. Hence without giving any proof of her degree, Claiming to be a Doctor is incorrect. Also As per the rule of law, each Doctor, is supposed to Display her medical certificates / Qualifications certificate, in a prominent position in her clinic. But when I went there, the certificate was not displayed. When I asked the staff members about the qualifications of Dr bhavna shah, they did not offered any satisfactory reply to me and kept on saying that she is highly qualified doctor. This attitude of not displaying the medical certificate and not producing even on asking, appears to be fishy to me and it appears that she is NOT A MEDICAL DOCTOR and FALSELY CLAIMING HERSELF AS A MEDICAL DOCTOR, BY WRITING DR IN FRONT OF HER NAME, IN NEWSPAPER ADVTS and MISGUIDING & CHEATING THE PROSPECTIVE CUSTOMERS, who trust the word DR. Hence it is cheating with false claims. 3- The advt also says MORE ADVANCED THAN U-LIPO. When I asked them, that on what basis, you are writing this claim, they could not produce any documents to support this claim, which proves, that it is a misleading claim, for trying to prove themselves superior over others. 4- They have also mentioned NO DIET in the advt. But when I went there for consultation, I was told by the counselor, that I will have to follow a crash diet plan and I will be assigned a dietitian for the same. She also informed me that there are 6-8 dietitians working in the center. It proves that that DIETING is integral part of the treatment and the word NO DIET Is mentioned in the advt to lure prospective clients with false claims about the service being a miracle which needs no diet control. This is a false claim in the newspaper advt, where as ground reality in the center is very different After coming back home, I searched in Google about this company and came to know that This firm is giving MISLEADING ADVT from a long time in the newspapers and many gullible people have fallen in their trap. Even MAHARASHTRA FDA has raided this center in may 2014 for making false claims in their advt, about their services being FDA APPROVED. http://www.dnaindia.com/mumbai/report-fda-trainsitsguns-on-dr-bhavana-shah-s-weight-loss-clinics-1984776 Even ASCI has banned the misleading advt of this firm in the Jan 2015 for making false claims in newspapers advt. check this link http://www.ascionline.org/index.php/jan-2015.html But this firm is back and giving misleading advt in newspaper and cheating / fooling the women in Mumbai city. Kindly look into the matter & stop such misleading advt which are appearing in prominent newspapers of Mumbai.” Complaint 2- Advt claims that dr bhavna shah is a doctor, but there is no degree on display in her center. Also on asking they did not produced the degree and said that she is a big doctor. It is false claim that she is a doctor and using the goodwill of the word DOCTOR to promote her business. advt also says, that 8 sessions of ulipo tummy tuck is free, but on asking they said, that you have buy services worth rs 60000 to get this free. This is not mentioned in advt, and hence is misleading. Advt says NO DIET, but when I went their for meeting i was told that i will have to follow diet chart and there are 6-8 dietitians in the center. It is a fraud to claim NO DIET in advt and then ask the customer to follow CRASH DIET. Also advt claims that FAT FREEZE IS MORE ADVANCED THAN ULIPO, BUT on asking they did not produced any basis of this claim. hence the claim is misleading. Even maharashtra fda has raided this center in May 2015 for making false claims in advt. ASCI has also banned the adv. asci has also banned the advt in Jan 2015 for making false claims in advt. there are thousand of complaints in police station also against this firm. Kindly check. "

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The Advertiser replied But they did not attend the hearing on the date and time conveyed to them. The CCC viewed the print advertisement. In the absence of specific comments in support of the claims, the CCC concluded that the claims, “8 Session of Tummy Tuck U-Lipo Rs. 20,000/-* FREE*”, “Fat Freeze More Advanced than U-Lipo”, and “No Diet”, were not substantiated and are misleading. Also, the visual showing the images of before and after the treatment were considered to be misleading. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaints were UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY: "Penguin School of Business Management "
PRODUCT: "Lifetime 100% Job Guarantee"

COMPLAINT:

“Lifetime 100% job Guarantee Bond”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

“This institute is deceiving students by writing 100% lifetime job Guarantee in newspaper (BOND). This is illegal and can not be printed.”

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date. The CCC viewed the print advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “Lifetime 100% job Guarantee Bond”, was not substantiated and is misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Om Sai Ayurveda India Limited "
PRODUCT: "Om Sai Ayurveda’s Range of OTC Products"

COMPLAINT:

"“1. Reduce Sugar OR Else Get Your Money Back*” “2. Over the past many years OM SAI AYURVEDA INDIA LIMITED is doing a deep research on Ayurveda. It is an ISO 9001: 2008 certified company that has found out a unique treatment that helps maintain the blood sugar level.” "

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims (in Hindi) as translated in English, “Reduce Sugar or Else Get Your Money Back*”, and “Over the past many years Om Sai Ayurveda India Limited is doing a deep research on Ayurveda. It is an ISO 9001: 2008 certified company that has found out a unique treatment that helps maintain the blood sugar level” were not substantiated and are misleading. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Naturoveda Health World "
PRODUCT: "Zilaxo"

COMPLAINT:

"“The fact that ‘Zilaxo Advanced Pain Solution’ has been awarded by the Union Minority Affairs Minister Najma Heptulla in 2015 as well as by the Union Science & Technology and ex-Health Minister Dr. Harsh Vardhan in 2016 has proved once again that its treatment procedure is very effective, completely safe and 100% scientific."" “Awarded as ""The Most Promising Brand Equipped With Internationally Acclaimed Technologies"" "

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser states that through natural, safe and technologically highly advanced method of treatment, they have been able to provide lasting result to a large number of their patients with symptoms of joint pain along with stiffness and inflammation. Advertiser also provided advertisement cuttings showing the details of awards given to them. The CCC concluded that the claims, “The fact that ‘Zilaxo Advanced Pain Solution’ has been awarded by the Union Minority Affairs Minister Najma Heptulla in 2015 as well as by the Union Science & Technology and ex-Health Minister Dr. Harsh Vardhan in 2016 has proved once again that its treatment procedure is very effective, completely safe and 100% scientific”, and “Awarded as ""The Most Promising Brand Equipped With Internationally Acclaimed Technologies"", were not substantiated with authentic supporting data and are misleading. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY: "Vee Care Marketing World Pvt Ltd "
PRODUCT: "Vee Care Ayurveda"

COMPLAINT:

"1. “Increase your height otherwise* get your money back.” 2. “This Medicine is helpful in increasing the Height. And it has No Side Effects” "

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims (in Hindi) as translated in English, “Increase your height otherwise* get your money back”, and “This Medicine is helpful in increasing the Height. And it has No Side Effects”, were not substantiated and are misleading. Also, specific to the claims related to increase in height, the advertisement is in Breach of the law as it violated The Drugs & Magic Remedies Act. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1, I.4 and III.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY:"LG Electronics India Pvt Ltd’s "
PRODUCT:"LG Air conditioners"

COMPLAINT:

"1. “The AC That Saves Every Day” 2. “LG - No.1 Air Conditioner” 3. “Mosquito Away” "

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims, “The AC That Saves Every Day”, “LG - No.1 Air Conditioner”, “Mosquito Away”, were not substantiated and are misleading. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY:"Dr P K Jain Clinic "
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"1. “World's No.1 TOP Ranking Sexologist” 2. “One and Only Experienced Highly Qualified Doctor” 3. “Masculine weakness, Early Ejaculation, Sperm faltering, Small and Extenuation organs and one and only secret disease specialist who is honoured with award by world level scientist research for successful treatment of other Venereal disease” 4. “Honoured by best sex clinic of the millennium award” 5. “Special successful Treatment for sexual problems like Sexual debility, Lack of sex, masculine weakness/Sexual Weakness and Undeveloped male organs” "

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date. The CCC viewed the print advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims (in Hindi) as translated in English, “World's No.1 TOP Ranking Sexologist”, “One and Only Experienced Highly Qualified Doctor”, “Masculine weakness, Early Ejaculation, Sperm faltering, Small and Extenuation organs and one and only secret disease specialist who is honoured with award by world level scientist research for successful treatment of other Venereal disease”, “Honoured by best sex clinic of the millennium award”, “Special successful Treatment for sexual problems like Sexual debility, Lack of sex, masculine weakness/Sexual Weakness and Undeveloped male organs”, were not substantiated and are misleading. Also specific to the claims related to successful treatment of sexual problems, and the advertisement visual implying enhancement of sexual pleasure, the advertisement is in Breach of the law as it violated The Drugs & Magic Remedies Act. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1, I.4 and III.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY: "Shree Maruti Herbals Pvt Ltd "
PRODUCT: "Stay On Power Oil"

COMPLAINT:

"1. “Helps rejuvenate and strengthens weak nerves.” 2. “Massage daily and experience the height of pleasure” "

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date. The CCC viewed the print advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims, “Helps rejuvenate and strengthens weak nerves”, and “Massage daily and experience the height of pleasure”, were not substantiated and are misleading. Also, the claims read in conjunction with 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, I.4 and III.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY: "Razorbill’s "
PRODUCT: "Razor Slim Capsules"

COMPLAINT:

“Razor slim is one stop solution for all the fat related problems of the patients. It reduces bad cholesterol and detoxifies the body. Razorslim has specifically chosen highly effective herbs which help reducing weight.”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date. The CCC viewed the print advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims, “Razor slim is one stop solution for all the fat related problems of the patients. It reduces bad cholesterol and detoxifies the body. Razorslim has specifically chosen highly effective herbs which help reducing weight.”, were not substantiated and are misleading. Also, the visual showing the images of before and after the treatment were considered to be misleading. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY: "KL University "
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“The ad of KL University claims, ‘Achieved 100% Placements in 2014-2015. Racing towards 100% Placements in 2015-2016.”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date. The CCC viewed the print advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims, “Achieved 100% Placements in 2014-2015”, and “Racing towards 100% Placements in 2015-2016”, were not substantiated and are misleading. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

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

COMPLAINT:

“Any Pizza Any Size @ 199 each when you buy 2 Pizzas”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"Pizzahut India misleading adverts on its website, on official Twitter and Facebook pages. Claims to give any size @ 199 each if ordered in pairs, but only while ordering one gets to know of the terms and conditions. And that is that only Personal and mediuk sized pizza available on offer. "

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date. The CCC viewed the website/internet advertisement, facebook advertisement, and promotional material. The CCC concluded that regardless of the disclaimer, the claim, “Any Pizza Any Size @ 199 each when you buy 2 Pizzas”, is misleading by omission and contravened Chapter I.4 of the ASCI Code. This complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY:"Khoday India Limited "
PRODUCT: "Peter Scot"

COMPLAINT:

"I would like to know the Add displayed on BMTC bus is under guidelines issued by the Information and Broadcasting Ministry as well as ASCI. Please find attached images of the bus branding done Khodays group for the branc Peter Scot with the brand extension of Gold Accessories displayed at the back of buses operated by BMTC. "

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date. The CCC viewed the Ad – Hoarding. The Advertiser did not provide the annual market sales data of the product/service advertised “Golf accessories”. The CCC concluded that the advertisement was a surrogate Ad for a promotion of a liquor product – Peter Scot. The Ad - Hoarding contravened Chapter III.6 (a) (b) of the ASCI Code and the Guidelines for Brand Extension product or service. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY:"Kent RO Systems Ltd "
PRODUCT: "Kent-Air Purifier"

COMPLAINT:

"‘House of Purity and most trusted brand in home appliances’, ‘protect your family from airborne diseases’ Kent-Air Purifier 1. Kent HEPA Technology makes the air in your homes/office rooms pure 2. Removes particulate matter (PM 2.5) from air 3. Protects you from harmful impurities in air "

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"The print advt (copy attached) calls Kent the 'House of Purity and most trusted brand in home appliances'. The advt describes four of the company's products that ""protect your family from waterborne diseases, airborne diseases and pesticides and chemicals in fruits and vegetables"". Our objections: 1. On what basis is Kent calling itself the 'House of Purity'? Can it substantiate this claim with any independent studies? 2. Can Kent prove that it is the 'most trusted brand in home appliances' with supporting data? 3. There are several causes for waterborne and airborne diseases. How can Kent claim to protect the consumer and his family from these?” Air Purifiers Claims 1. Kent HEPA Technology makes the air in your homes/office rooms pure 2. Removes particulate matter (PM 2.5) from air 3. Protects you from harmful impurities in air Our queries 1. Does the manufacturer have data from independent studies to substantiate the 3 claims? 2. How does HEPA technology work? "

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing and submitted their written response. The advertiser sought additional time of seven days to respond to the complaint which was granted to them. The claim support data was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC viewed the print advertisement, and considered the Advertiser’s response as well as opinion of the Technical expert presented at the meeting. The Advertiser claims that ""House of Purity"" is a registered IPR (trademarked/copyright). No proof of trademark was provided. Copyright registration of a logo that included the phrase under contention was provided. The CCC did not consider the “House of Purity” terminology to be objectionable. This complaint was NOT UPHELD. For the claim “Most trusted brand in Home appliances”, the Advertiser quotes a ""Brand Trust Report,"" published by ""Trust Research Advisory,"" in which Kent is declared as the most trusted brand in its category. While the CCC acknowledged this report, the claim “most trusted brand in home appliances” was considered to be misleading by ambiguity and omission of the reference to the sub-category of “Water purifiers” in which it has topped the list. The claim “Most trusted brand in Home Appliances” was not substantiated. Also, the source and date of the Brand Trust Report is not mentioned in the advertisement. This contravened Chapters I.1, I.2 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. This complaint was UPHELD. The Advertiser explained the working of the HEPA filter and submitted third party test reports. The CCC acknowledged that the purifier reduced particulate matter of size 2.5 micrometers (PM2.5) from an initial 225 micrograms per cubic meter of air to about 25 micrograms per cubic meter of air. However, this was only reduction and not removal. Thus the extent of reduction makes the claim of ""removal"" incorrect; as it only “reduces” the particulate matter to some extent. Also, this removal is of only particulate matter and does not signify chemical purity of air. Other than the PM2.5 reduction, no tests or evidence of ""Protects you from harmful impurities in air"" or “protect your family from airborne diseases” was provided. The CCC noted that the product is only helpful in improving the particulate quality of air. The CCC concluded that the claims, “Makes the air in your homes/office rooms pure with Kent HEPA Technology”, “Removes particulate matter (PM 2.5) from air” and “Protects you from harmful impurities in air”, “protect your family from airborne diseases” were not adequately substantiated and are therefore considered to be misleading by implication that the product provides more benefits that it actually delivers and by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code This complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY:"Kent RO Systems Ltd "
PRODUCT: "Kent Vacuum Cleaners "

COMPLAINT:

"Kent Vacuum Cleaners “Make your bed clean by removing dust and particulates and disinfecting with UV light” “Low particulate discharge because of HEPA filter” "

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"Vacuum Cleaners Claims 1. Makes your bed clean by removing dust and particulates and disinfecting with UV light 2. Low particulate discharge because of HEPA filter Our queries 1. How is disinfecting with UV light carried out? Is it safe for the consumer? 2. How does the HEPA filter work? "

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing and submitted their written response. The advertiser sought additional time of seven days to respond to the complaint, which was granted to them. The technical expert of ASCI reviewed the claim support data. The CCC viewed the print advertisement, and considered the Advertiser’s response as well as opinion of the Technical expert presented at the meeting. The Advertiser has explained the working of the HEPA filter. The claim of “Low particulate discharge because of HEPA filter” was not considered to be objectionable. This complaint was NOT UPHELD. The advertiser states that the manual of the product is the basis of their reply relating to claims of killing dust mites, bacteria and other organisms (The CCC observed that the last item “other organisms” has not been defined). The CCC noted that, there is no test report to substantiate the claims of disinfection by killing of dust mites, bacteria and other organisms. The CCC concluded that the claim “Makes your bed clean by disinfecting with UV light” was not substantiated and is misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the Code. This complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY: "Ibibo Group Private Limited "
PRODUCT: "Goibibo.com"

COMPLAINT:

"Get 2000 Cashback" (Flight Bookings) OR "Get 100% Cashback" (Hotel Bookings)

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"The advertisement is made via multiple Channels: The internet / email marketing / online videos etc. The text of the ad says varients of the following: ""Get 2000 Cashback"" (Flight Bookings) OR ""Get 100% Cashback"" (Hotels Bookings) etc. Images & links are attached. The term ""Cashback"" has a very specific & unambiguous meaning in the minds of most consumers. ""Cash"" is a mode of monetary transaction distinct from other, more restricted forms (e.g. checks, vouchers) due to its liquidity and lack of constraints on redemption or exchange. In the context of the current ad by Goibibo what is offered is merely what would be reasonably called ""rewards points"" or some such. It is explicitly NOT ""cash"" in any sense of the word. Hence to refer to these discounts as a ""cashback"" is intentionally misleading & untruthful. It is a distortion of fact by implication and is bound to lead to subsequent disappointment in the minds of consumers. This advertisement seems to be in direct violation of Sections 1.1, 1.4 and 1.5 of the ASCI Code. Furthermore, other advertisers do offer ""cashback"" in the true sense of the word (e.g. banks or paytm where the actual amount is refunded to the consumer at a later date) and hence the intentionally misleading use of the term ""Cashback"" in Goibibo advertising is unfair to Competition. "

RECOMMENDATION:NOT UPHELD

"The advertiser representatives were given personal hearing by ASCI with the technical expert. Advertiser confirmed that they wish to seek a review of claims taken up in the earlier decision except for the claim – “helps reduce dark spots”. The claim support data was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC viewed the product packaging and the TVC, and considered the Advertiser’s response for Review as well as opinion of the Technical expert presented at the meeting. The CCC noted that the specific claim related to one tone fairer effect, this perception of “one tone” was based on shade cards that were used in the consumer perception study as submitted in the first response to the complaint. Advertiser was asked to provide clinical evidence to show that the “whitening” is physiological and not just by virtue of removal dirt by cleansing. The additional data now describes machine based measurements of skin tone and brightness using a chromameter. The study indicates increase in skin luminance. However how this translates into “number of shades / tones” was not provided in the support data. The CCC concluded that Pack claims, “instant whitening”, “Gives 1 tone fairer looking skin in one wash” were not substantiated. The TVC claim, “You think only cream can give you visible fairness? Think again …. This fights dark spots and gives instant whitening”, was misleading by implication. The product packaging and the TVC contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The decision of complaint being Upheld stands on Review."

 

COMPANY:"Patanjali Ayurved Ltd"
PRODUCT: "Patanjali Dant Kanti"

COMPLAINT:

"""It is trusted brands of crores countrymen."" “Herbal toothpaste” “Give 'long duration' protection” “Full profit of this product is educational charity” "

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"“The ad describes various toothpaste product of Patanjali. This has many problematic statements. - It is trusted brands of crores countrymen. This claim is exaggerated. - It claims 'herbal toothpaste' but one showed in photo is 'Medicated' toothpaste. Which contains chemical. - It claims to give 'long duration' protection. This is not backed by any data. - It claims in bottom of ad that the full profit of this product is educational charity. This needs a check.” "

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser argues that Patanjali Dant Kanti is considered to be one of their most selling products and have sales of over Rs. 425 crores of this product alone as per media coverage. No other authentic data was provided by the advertiser to substantiate their claim that “It is a trusted brand of crores of countrymen”. For the claim “Herbal toothpaste” the Advertiser argues that products are licensed as Ayurvedic Proprietary medicines and ingredients are majorly herbal and natural. The CCC acknowledged that the product was registered as an ayurvedic product and had some herbal ingredients; However, their quantity was not significant to claim the whole product to be “Herbal”. Advertiser further argues that they are not making specific claims, in terms of the number of hours of protection that would require any backing. As manufacturers, they should be able to endorse their product for its qualities that are its attributes. The advertiser also states that as part of Corporate Social Responsibility, they are making donations to a number of charitable trusts. Advertiser submitted few donation receipts and Form 80G certificates, which allow tax exemption to donors who donate their funds to such organizations. However this did not correspond to the claim of “full profit” being given for educational charity. The CCC reviewed the data and concluded that the claims, “It is trusted brands of crores of countrymen”, “herbal toothpaste”, “long duration protection”,“full profit of this product is educational charity” were not adequately substantiated and are misleading by ambiguity and exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY: "Patanjali Ayurved Ltd"
PRODUCT: "Divya Swasari Pravahi"

COMPLAINT:

"""Thousands banned drugs are being sold by betraying trust. Due to that 'thousands' companies are getting fined."" “Their medicine has 0% side effect and 100% effective.” “They have used this product for more than 20 years on 'LACS and CRORES' of people.” "

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"“The ad is about cough remedy made with herbs. Multiple claims are done which are not backed by facts and figures and exaggerated. Claim 1) Thousands banned drugs are being sold by betraying trust. Due to that 'thousands' companies are getting fined. Claim 2) Their medicine has 0% side effect and 100% effective. Claim 3) They have used this product for more than 20 years on 'LACS and CRORES' of people. Claim 4) Home remedy given without warning of 'consulting physician before applying'.” "

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. The Advertiser argues that the claim “Thousands banned drugs are being sold by betraying trust. Due to that 'thousands' companies are getting fined” is based on a newspaper article with reference to proposed ban on 300 drugs which has been stayed by the Delhi High Court. The CCC concluded that the advertiser’s claim is false and is misleading by gross exaggeration. Advertiser states that their product is an Ayurvedic medicine and contains natural ingredients and comply with applicable regulations such as FSSAI. However, the advertiser did not produce any evidence to prove the claim “0% side effects and 100% effective”. The CCC concluded, in the absence of any authentic data, the claims, “Their medicine has 0% side effect and 100% effective”, “They have used this product for more than 20 years on 'LACS and CRORES' of people” were not substantiated and are misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY: "Razorbill "
PRODUCT: "Razor Slim Ayurvedic Instant Slimming Capsule"

COMPLAINT:

"Order Razor Slim for Instant Fat Loss Today”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"“Advertisement promotes a product/medicine called Razor Slim which claims rapid weight loss in patients. It states a few testimonials from clients who lost 30 kg in six months. Also, mentions endorsements by two doctors- one MBBS, MD and one BAMS. The mentioned product is a medicine and not a food product or supplement. Medicines are not supposed to be advertised with paid ads in newspapers. Also, it is against 'professional ethics' for doctors to endorse medicinal products through paid advertisements. \They use two doctors to sell the drug/medicine. Also, last line of ad is false and misleading-""Order Razor Slim for Instant Fat Loss Today'. It implies 'Instant Fat Loss', which is untrue and dangerous. Ad needs to be reported to IMA and Ministry(MOHFW). Plus, there is no disclaimer of possible dangers and no safety data; no info on safety in pregnancy and breastfeeding.” "

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. As claim support data, Advertiser submitted testimonial of one patient and product licence copy. The CCC noted that the Advertiser did not provide any clinical evidence or proof of efficacy for the product in support of their claim. The CCC concluded that the claim, "Order Razor Slim for Instant Fat Loss Today” was not substantiated and is grossly misleading by exaggeration. The print advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Aldine Ventures Pvt Ltd "
PRODUCT: "Aldine CA"

COMPLAINT:

“Study from India's best final faculty", “Study from India's best CPT faculty"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"1.That the accused/violators herein is a company registered under the Companies Act, 1956 and claims to be interalia engaged in the business of imparting education and training and offers education and training in the field of education and skill up- gradation programs to CA aspirants through its education centres established at various locations all over India under the Trade Name of ""ALDINE-CA"". 2.That the accused persons herein for the promotion and advertising of its above mentioned business have displayed and publicised on their official website i.e. www.aldine.edu.in in the form of electronic advertisement including other publication as displayed across India through broushers, pamphlets, glowsign boards, news paper advertisements, banners etc containing false, misleading and deceptive advertisements without disclosing the details of publication or medium, which released the alleged rankings, in gross violation of ASCI guidelines for advertising of Educational Institutions and programs. Further additional breach are as follows: •The accused herein in slide 1which appear as soon as the official page of the website is opened, has duly specified in the said slide the past rankings achieved by the students in CPTIIPCC final 2015, but the said advertisement does not disclose the source and the authority which has published and released the said ranking nor does the said advertisement discloses the identity and other relevant details of the students who have achieved the said rankings. •That the accused in another advertisement on the said official website has duly specified and used the tag lines ""study from India's best final faculty"" and tlStudy from India's best CPT faculty"" which on the very face of is not only deceptive and misleading but is completely a self proclaimed laud which is evident from the fact that the said advertisement does not disclose any source or authority who has declared and conferred or accredited the said faculty working at the accused company as the best final or CPT faculty. 3. That it is relevant to mention that the basic object of the advertisement is to promote a product or a service, one does see a bit of exaggeration in the way they extol the virtues of the product, but when it goes beyond the reasonable and permissible limits and deliberately utters a falsehood or tries to misrepresent facts thereby misleading the consumer, then it becomes objectionable. The advertisements in question on the very face of it are not only misleading the consumers by making self proclaimed exaggerated and untrue claims without having disclosed the substantive basis for the same but the said act of the accused also jeopardises the healthy competition existing in the said field. 4. That in light of the above stated facts and events, the complainant through this complaint, is approaching your good selves in the hope that appropriate action will be taken under the relevant provisions of the law against the abovementioned persons for their illegal, wrongful and malign acts, in the interest of justice. 5. That the present complaint has been made in bonafide and in the interest of justice. "

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The CCC noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and noted that the advertisement is making superlative claims about their faculty being India’s best. Such a comparitive claim is not practically possible given the vast nature of the field of education and presence of a large number of institutes across India. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims, "study from India's best final faculty" and “Study from India's best CPT faculty", were false and misleading. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY: "Naturoveda Health World "
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"1. “Piles, Fissure and Fistula can be eradicated without surgery.” 2. The unique combination of Fundamentals of Ayurveda, Unani and Scientific Yoga can eradicate such anorectal diseases without surgery. 3. Winner of Hakim Ajmal Khan Global Award for the Best Ayurvedic & Unani Clinic. "

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"These claims need to be substantiated with necessary support data "

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. The Advertiser argues that through application of unique combination of Fundamentals of Ayurveda, Unani and Scientific Yoga anorectal ailments can be eradicated. Advertiser submitted testimonial of their patient; However, Advertiser did not provide any clinical evidence or proof of efficacy for the product in support of the claims. No details of the product being prescribed and it’s benefits were submitted. Advertiser asserts that they have won Global Award for the Best Ayurvedic and Unani Clinic. However, the CCC noted that details of the award, criteria used for the choice of a clinic and parameters on which it was rated as the best was not made available. Also, the date and source for this award as a reference was missing in the advertisement. The CCC concluded that the claims, ““Piles, Fissure and Fistula can be eradicated without surgery.” “The unique combination of Fundamentals of Ayurveda, Unani and Scientific Yoga can eradicate such anorectal diseases without surgery” were not substantiated and were misleading by exaggeration. The claim of “Winner of Hakim Ajmal Khan Global Award for the Best Ayurvedic & Unani Clinic” was not adequately substantiated with authentic support data and the year of the award was also not mentioned in the advertisement. Specific to the claim implying cure of Piles and fistula (conditions referred in Schedule J of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act) the advertisement 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: "Pushkara Herbals "
PRODUCT: "Pushkara Bone & Joint Capsules"

COMPLAINT:

“Doctor’s Trusted Brand”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"This claim needs to be substantiated with necessary support data "

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The CCC noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date. The CCC viewed the print advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim “Doctor’s Trusted Brand” was not substantiated with any data and is misleading. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY: "Lifezen Healthcare Pvt Ltd’s "
PRODUCT: "Eye Spa Eye Drops"

COMPLAINT:

"The TVC dialogues are as follows: You think only cream can give you physical fairness? Think again Garnier White Complete Double Action Facewash, enriched with lemon extract and white clay, in a unique double texture formula. This fights dark spots and gives instant whitening. Now fairness starts with a wash! Pack Claim on the Product states that with every wash, the consumer would get “one tone fairer skin” Pack Claim on the Product states that upon the usage of the Product, “Dark Spots are reduced” "

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"This claim needs to be substantiated with necessary support data "

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. The Advertiser states that the claim is with reference to “CMC formula” and not specific for their brand. They are only referring to CMC (sodium carboxymethyl cellulose) which is widely used in the treatment of dry eyes by eye specialists in India & worldwide. The CCC concluded that the claim, “No. 1 Formula Recommended By Eye Specialists” was not substantiated with evidence that CMC formula is the most recommended formula and the claim is misleading by ambiguity and implication that the claim holds for the advertiser’s product. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

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

COMPLAINT:

"1. “Secret to a Happy Married Life” 2. “Increase your Power, Strength, Extra Timing and Energy” "

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. The Advertiser states that the said substantiation is taken from Ancient Ayurvedic Granthas viz. Bhavprakash, Vagbhat and that in the said granthas the Sexual problems Treatment has been mentioned. Also, the visual in advertisement clearly suggest happy married life and not violating any of the provisions of Drugs and Magic Remedies Act. The CCC concluded that the claim (in Hindi) as translated in English, “Increase your Power, Strength, Extra Timing and Energy” was not substantiated with evidence of product efficacy and was misleading by implication . Also, the claims, “Secret to a Happy Married Life” “one tablet one hour prior”, “Immediate effect”, “For powerful stamina” read in conjunction with the advertisement visual and pack visual of a couple implies that the product is meant for enhancement of sexual pleasure, which is in Breach of the law as it violated The Drugs & Magic Remedies Act. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1, I.4 and III.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY: "Olivet Pharma Pvt Ltd "
PRODUCT: "Ayusya Superspeciality Treatment Centre"

COMPLAINT:

“Get Freedom from Osteoarthritis, Rheumatoid Arthritis”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"This claim needs to be substantiated with necessary support data "

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The CCC noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date. The CCC viewed the print advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “Get Freedom from Osteoarthritis, Rheumatoid Arthritis” was not substantiated and is misleading. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY:"ETA Star Appliances Private Limited "
PRODUCT: "Vestar AC"

COMPLAINT:

“Upto 50% Power Saving”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"This claim needs to be substantiated with necessary support data "

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The CCC noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and concluded that in the absence of evidence of how the Ac saves power as claimed, the claim. “Up to 50% Power Saving” was not substantiated and is misleading by ambiguity. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY: "Symphony Ltd "
PRODUCT: "Symphony Air Coolers"

COMPLAINT:

“1. India's Most Trusted Cooler Brand” “2. It consumes the same amount of electricity as a fan”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"These claim needs to be substantiated with necessary support data "

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The CCC noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date. The CCC viewed the print advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims, “India's Most Trusted Cooler Brand”, “It consumes the same amount of electricity as a fan” were not substantiated with any evidence of technical testing or market research and are misleading. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY: "Herbal Clinic "
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"“1. Sexual Weakness? Don’t be disappointed 2. Treats Nightfall, Premature Ejaculation, and Impotence.” "

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"These claim need to be substantiated with necessary support data "

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The CCC noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date. The CCC viewed the print advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims, “Sexual Weakness? Don’t be disappointed”, and “Treats Nightfall, Premature Ejaculation, and Impotence” were not substantiated and are misleading. Also, specific to the claims implying treatment for impotence and sexual problems, the Ad is in Breach of the law as it violated The Drugs & Magic Remedies Act. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1, I.4 and III.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY: "Bhanwar Rathore Design studio "
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"1. “India’s No.1 Design Entrance Coaching Center” 2. “Highest selection record from BRDS as compared to any coaching institute in India.” "

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"These claims need to be substantiated with necessary support data "

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. The advertiser asserts that they are the only institute, which has the highest result (selection) as compared to any other coaching institute. The CCC concluded that the claims, “India’s No.1 Design Entrance Coaching Canter”, “Highest selection record from BRDS as compared to any coaching institute in India,” were not substantiated with authentic comparative data or with a third party certification. Such a comparative claim is not practically possible given the vast nature of the field of education and presence of a large number of institutes across India. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY: "SCMS Group of Educational Institutions "
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“SCMS is ranked as No.1 in Kerala since 1998”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"This claim needs to be substantiated with necessary support data "

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser argues though they are the only business school that has secured a rank within the best 50 from Kerala, they only claim “No.1 among the business schools in Kerala”. The CCC reviewed the data submitted by the advertiser and noted that in 1998 as per Business Today, Sshool of Management held 31st rank, University of Calicut held 46th rank whereas SCMS held 47th rank. The SCMS was not ranked No. 1 in Kerala in 1998 and there have been other institutes from Kerala with higher ranking than SCMS in subsequent years. The CCC concluded that the claim, “SCMS is ranked as No.1 in Kerala since 1998” is false and is grossly misleading. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY: "Ucmas West Bengal "
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“World No.1 ABACUS Training program”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"This claim needs to be substantiated with necessary support data "

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The CCC noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date. The CCC viewed the print advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “World No.1 ABACUS Training program” was not substantiated with any authentic support data or evidence to show it’s worldwide ranking and is misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY: "Apollo Engineering College "
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“100 / 100 Placements.”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"This claim needs to be substantiated with necessary support data "

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The CCC noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date. The CCC viewed the print advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “100/100 Placements” was not substantiated and is misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY: "Bakliwal Tutorirals (IIT) "
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“Maharashtra’s No.1 IIT-JEE Institute.”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"This claim needs to be substantiated with necessary support data "

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser argues that there is no set criteria for any institute to claim No. 1 ranking. The advertiser also goes on to state that there are many institutes in Pune claiming to be the best. As a rationale to claim No. 1, the advertiser states that since JEE Advanced is the exam through which selection in IITs happen and their student was Maharashtra rank 1 in that exam, they claim to be Maharashtra’s No 1 IITJEE Institute. While the institute may claim to have a topper from the institute, the CCC did not agree that this datapoint is relevant for claming No.1 for the institute. Such a comparative claim is not practically possible given the vast nature of the field of education and presence of a large number of institutes across Maharashtra. In the absence of any authentic comparitive data versus other institutes of similar nature, the CCC concluded that the claim, “Maharashtra’s No.1 IIT-JEE Institute” was not substantiated and is misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY: "Gurukul Institute "
PRODUCT: "Personal Coaching for Spoken English"

COMPLAINT:

“No.1 Since 1987”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"This claim needs to be substantiated with necessary support data "

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The CCC noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date. The CCC viewed the print advertisement. Such a comparative claim is not practically possible given the vast nature of the field of education and presence of a large number of such institutes across India. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “No 1 since 1987” was not substantiated and is misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY: "Amirta International Institute Of Hotel Management & Catering Technology (International University Diploma) "
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“100% Placement.”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"This claim needs to be substantiated with necessary support data"

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser argues that, they provide 100% job by imparting training to their students. Their students are selected for international training and got appointments in Malaysian hotels. As claim support data, Advertiser submitted their email correspondence inviting companies for campus recruitment, list of shortlisted candidates and few offer letters. However in absence of the details of the actual batch size of students, their list with details and evidence of their placement, the CCC concluded that the claim of “100% placement” was not substantiated and is misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY:"Shishu Soap & Chemicals Pvt. Ltd "
PRODUCT: "Rekha Detergent Powder"

COMPLAINT:

"Claim: “Ab maine bhi mana Rekha Detergent Cake Aur Powder se Behter Kuch bhi Nahin” (Now I also believe that there is no powder better is better than Rekha Detergent Powder). "

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"“Unsubstantiated and misleading claim Claim: “Ab maine bhi mana Rekha Detergent Cake Aur Powder se Behter Kuch bh iNahin” (Now I also believe that there is no powder better is better than Rekha Detergent Powder). We would like to submit that the claim in itself is false and unsubstantiated as there are multiple well-known superior products in the market for long with substantial market share. The Advertiser without any comparative data with competition available in the market, cannot make such an objective claim and neither can celebrity endorse it without substantiation, otherwise being a false statement. They have used a popular celebrity to endorse the claim to mislead the consumers. As celebrities are placed at a higher pedestal by the general public, it is all the more necessary to ensure that statements by them are not false and misleading as it can sway the purchasing decision of the consumers easily. It is also pertinent to note that laundry products cater to an extensive rural and bottom of the pyramid consumer base who are vulnerable to being easily misled with statements made by the Advertiser, particularly when endorsed by a celebrity”. "

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser argues that, the Celebrity in ther advertisment is their Company’s legal Brand Ambassador for three years, who herself has used the product. Also, being their brand endorser, they have the copy right to use such tag line which has been used by their celebrity during commercials. However, the advertiser did not provide any evidence of the celebrity having used the product or endorsing the claimed product benefit statement. The advertiser did not submit any data regarding product efficacy or it’s superiority versus other marketed products. The CCC concluded that the claim, “Ab maine bhi mana Rekha Detergent Cake Aur Powder se Behter Kuch bhi Nahin” was not substantiated and is misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

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

COMPLAINT:

"“The ad is directly promoting 'Play-Win' Capsules as an aphrodisiac by stating in the body copy: "" ... This badly affects their love life. They are unable to enjoy their love life. If you are suffering from a similar kind of problem, there is no need to worry, Play Win Capsules are effective for this kind of problems. Which can help you gain your power, stamina, strength. "" The headline ""If you want to make your life happy! Then make your wife happy!!! Seen in conjunction with the illustration of a couple & Sub headline Make your relationship more stronger"", clearly indicates that it is for sexual enhancement. Effect starts from 1st day. What 'effect'? Can the manufacturer substantiate it? What's gain your power, stamina, strength? Can this too be substantiated? The manufacturer needs to be prevented from making such claims about the product.” "

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser states that the claims are based on Ancient Ayurvedic Granthas which have been in existence since thousands of years ago viz. Bhavprakash, Vagbhat and that in the said granthas, the Sexual problems Treatment has been mentioned. The CCC noted that the advertiser acknowledges that their advertisement is about “Vajikaran”(sexual treatment). The CCC concluded that the advertiser did no substantiate the product claims “Effect starts from first day” with evidence of product efficacy and the claims are misleading by implication. Also, the claims, "If you want to make your life happy! Then make your wife happy!!!”, “…This badly affects their love life as well. They are unable to enjoy their love life.” “Play Win Capsules are effective for this kind of problems. Which can help you gain your power, stamina, strength”, “By massage on weak nerves with few drops of Play Win oil, it will strengthen the vital organs of the body. This will ensure happy and satisfied married life” read in conjunction with the advertisement visual and pack visual indicates that the product is meant for enhancement of sexual pleasure, which is in Breach of the law as it violated The Drugs & Magic Remedies Act. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1, I.4 and III.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY: "Dynamic Memory Pvt. Ltd (Dr. Biswaroop) "
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"‘Diabetes Type I & II cure in 72 Hrs’ "

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"Curing type 1 and type 2 diabtes within 72 hours. The website of this doctor contains lot of unscientific information and misleading many people to cure type 1 and type 2 diabetes that can never be cured. IF he has really cured, please substantiate the claims with proper clinical studies and research papers. "

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the website/internet advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser asserts that more than 500 patients have been cured using "72hrs Diabetes Type 1& 2 Cure" program/technique. Advertiser mentions about this technique being implemented in Mangalore University and the scientific Evidence of the technique is published in their Books ' Diabetes Type 1& 2 Cure in 72 hrs" & " Last Days of Diabetes'. However the CCC noted that this eidence was not submitted to ASCI. Advertiser provided YouTube links to access testimonials by some of their patients. The advertiser also informed that Dr Biswaroop Roy is not a Medical Doctor (allopathic) but is a teacher. A copy of certificates of Biswaroop Roy indicated that he has done certificate course on plant based nutrition and e-learning course on diabetes education; However, the documents did not establish him to be a medical professional or support his expertise in the field of diabetes treatment. The CCC concluded that in the absence of authentic support data and clinical evidence of the treatment being advertised, the claim ‘Diabetes Type I & II cure in 72 Hrs’ is false and is grossly misleading. Also, with reference to the advertisement claiming cure of diabetes, the website/internet advertisement is in Breach of the law as it violated The Drugs & Magic Remedies Act. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1, I.4 and III.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY: "Apeejay Education Society "
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"Highest Package - 7.05 LPA, Average package - 3.12 LPA.”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"This claim needs to be substantiated with necessary support data "

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The CCC noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date. The CCC viewed the print advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “Highest Salary 6.2 L & Avg Salary 3.6 L”, was not substantiated with evidence to prove that the students have availed the claimed salary packages. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY: "Lloyd Business School "
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“100% Assured OJT Linked Placement”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"This claim needs to be substantiated with necessary support data "

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser states that they have signed a MOU with another Institute to ensure “100% Placement” and submitted a copy of the MOU as claim support data. Although the advertiser submitted an MOU, it did not conclusively establish that placement was 100% effected. The CCC concluded that the claim, “100% Assured OJT Linked Placement” was not substantiated with details of the batch size of the students and evidence of their placement. The advertisement is misleading by ambiguity and implication that the OJT will materialize into placement. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "IMS-NOIDA (IMS Ghaziabad)"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“More than 100% Placement of PGDM (2013- 15)”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"This claim needs to be substantiated with necessary support data "

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The CCC noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date. The CCC viewed the print advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “100% Placement”, was not substantiated with data to prove placement of each of the students as claimed. The advertisement is misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY:"Crompton Greaves Consumer Electricals Ltd"
PRODUCT: "Temperature Sensing technology, E-sense"

COMPLAINT:

"“We would like to draw your attention to the recently released creative by Crompton (Crompton Greaves Fans) to communicate about their new offering of fans with temperature sensing technology, namely ‘E-sense’. This term bears close resemblance to our range of fans ‘E-series’, which is rather well accepted in the market and clearly associated with Usha Fans, ever since its launch in February, 2014. Under the name E-series, Usha has launched 3 fans and plans to add many more within the series. We have also learnt from our market sources that Crompton is planning to introduce a complete series of fans with this technology and they are going to call it ‘E-sense series’. We would like to challenge the use of term ‘E-sense’ in the communication by Crompton as this is deceptively close to E-series from USHA”. "

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION:NOT UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the promotional material of the advertiser, supportings submitted by the complainant and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser states that their product, ‘Avancer e-sense’ has no resemblance or interference with E-SERIES of USHA either in terms of look and feel or in terms of specifications, features and/or benefit positioning. It is a brand extension of their existing Fan model “Avancer”. The ‘e’ is a generic term that is used to communicate or denote electronic and ‘sense’ is derived from sensor. The CCC concluded that the reference to E-sense in the advertisement is not so similar to that of the complainant’s communication material and is not in contravention of the ASCI Code. The complaint was NOT UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY:"Patanjali Ayurved Limited "
PRODUCT:"Patanjali Kesh Kanti Shikakai Hair Cleanser"

COMPLAINT:

"1. Reduce hair fall, irrespective of the Products being a wash-off product 2. Reduce greying and itchy scalp "

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"“Patanjali Kesh Kanti Shikakai Hair Cleanser (Shikakai Variant) claims that it reduces hair fall, graying and itchy scalp. Claim - The Products reduce hair fall, irrespective of the Products being a wash-off product: From the declarations on the packaging, it is clear that the Products are surfactant based products, used for cleansing, i.e., very similar to other shampoo products. It needs to be appreciated that such products have a very limited time of application on the hair or on the scalp, and is washed off. Such products cleanse, and can provide benefits which are possible by cleansing products, and cannot provide benefits which require the product to be applied and retained on the scalp. In fact, the Products have ‘Instructions for Use’ in the packaging, which clearly mentions that the Products are supposed to be messaged for about a minute and then washed off. It is also worth noting that the Manufacturer sells these Products as Ayurvedic Proprietary Medicines. In Ayurveda, hair-loss is known as Khalitya, which is related to body type and the balance of the mind-body constitution (doshas). People who have excess Pitta in their body are likely to lose excess hair. In Ayurveda, it is also believed that massaging of the scalp with herbs and oils can help pacify Pitta, and thereby reduce hair loss. However, the Manufacturer herein claims that his cleansing product alongwith a few other ingredients can actually deliver the above benefit, and thereby reduce hair loss. It needs to be proven by way of stringent scientific data that the Products as a whole (and not just ingredients) can deliver this benefit. The Manufacturer also needs to show beyond any doubt as to how the final Product, with the levels of incorporation of the ingredients, when used as per the Instruction for Use as given on the product packaging, can deliver the benefit of reducing hair fall. We strongly believe that such a benefit cannot be achieved from the Product, and the claim is therefore blatantly false and misleading the entire consumer community as a whole. Claim on the Shikakai Variant – The Product reduces graying: In Ayurveda, pre-mature graying of hair is termed as ‘Palitya’, which is considered as pure ‘Paitik’ disorders, i.e., rising out of pitta. The treatment involves messaging of hair and/or scalp with herbs (or products which contain such herbs) to allow penetration of the benefits of the herbs in the scalp, and thereby can prevent pre-mature graying of hair. Yet again, the Manufacturer here claims to deliver this benefit from a hair cleansing products, similar to a cosmetic shampoo, which would be washed off from the scalp upon usage. It is pertinent to note that the claim is with respect to the product reducing hair graying. Hence, to survive the claim, the Manufacturer must produce adequate evidence through clinical trial to show that the product as a whole delivers the benefit of prevention of hair graying. Without such data, the claim is unsubstantiated with the only intent of misleading the gullible consumers who associate hair grey with old age. It is urged that the Manufacturer is clearly making very tall and misleading claims with respect to its Products. It is pertinent to note that in the garb of manufacturing ayurvedic products, a Manufacturer cannot be permitted to make unsubstantiated claims. However, for a wash off product that is applied for a few minutes on the hair to make such tall claims is inconceivable”. "

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing and submitted their written response. Advertiser submitted product licence copy and indicated that they would require two months to submit clinical report of this product. The CCC viewed the product packaging and concluded that in the absence of any evidence for the efficacy of the product, the claim, “Reduces hair fall, graying and itchy scalp” was not substantiated and is misleading. The product packaging of Kesh Kanti shikakai Hair cleanser contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY:"Patanjali Ayurved Limited "
PRODUCT:"Patanjali Kesh Kanti Reetha Hair Cleanser"

COMPLAINT:

“Removes oiliness and strengthens roots”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"“Patanjali Kesh Kanti Reetha Hair Cleanser claims that it removes oiliness and strengthens roots Claim on the Reetha Variant – The Product strengthens roots: In Reetha Variant of the Product Patanjali Kesh Kanti, the Manufacturer claims that the Product strengthens hair roots. To be able to make this claim, the Manufacturer ought to be able to produce data to show how a wash-off product works to strengthen roots of hair. It is urged that the Manufacturer is clearly making very tall and misleading claims with respect to its Products. It is pertinent to note that in the garb of manufacturing ayurvedic products, a Manufacturer cannot be permitted to make unsubstantiated claims. However, for a wash off product that is applied for a few minutes on the hair to make such tall claims is inconceivable”. "

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing and submitted their written response. Advertiser submitted product licence copy and indicated that they would require two months to submit clinical report of this product. The CCC viewed the product packaging and did not consider the claim of “Removes oiliness” to be objectionable for a Reetha based cleanser. This complaint was NOT UPHELD. However, in the absence of any evidence for the efficacy of the product, the CCC concluded that the claim, “strengthens roots” was not substantiated and is misleading. The product packaging of Kesh Kanti Reetha Hair Cleanser contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. This complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY:"Patanjali Ayurved Ltd "
PRODUCT:"Patanjali Kesh Kanti Natural Hair Cleanser"

COMPLAINT:

"Reduce hair fall, irrespective of the Products being a wash-off product "

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"“Patanjali Kesh Kanti Natural Hair Cleanser (Natural Variant) claims that it removes hair fall, hair breakage and dryness. Claim - The Products reduce hair fall, irrespective of the Products being a wash-off product: The Manufacturer claims that the Natural Variant of the Products reduces hair fall. In fact, in the Natural Variant, the Manufacturer claims that the product reduces both hair fall and hair breakage. Hence, while referring to hair fall, the Manufacturer clearly implies hair shedding. From the declarations on the packaging, it is clear that the Products are surfactant based products, used for cleansing, i.e., very similar to other shampoo products. It needs to be appreciated that such products have a very limited time of application on the hair or on the scalp, and is washed off. Such products cleanse, and can provide benefits which are possible by cleansing products, and cannot provide benefits which require the product to be applied and retained on the scalp. In fact, the Products have ‘Instructions for Use’ in the packaging, which clearly mentions that the Products are supposed to be messaged for about a minute and then washed off. It is also worth noting that the Manufacturer sells these Products as Ayurvedic Proprietary Medicines. In Ayurveda, hair-loss is known as Khalitya, which is related to body type and the balance of the mind-body constitution (doshas). People who have excess Pitta in their body are likely to lose excess hair. In Ayurveda, it is also believed that messaging of the scalp with herbs and oils can help pacify Pitta, and thereby reduce hair loss. However, the Manufacturer herein claims that his cleansing product alongwith a few other ingredients can actually deliver the above benefit, and thereby reduce hair loss. It needs to be proven by way of stringent scientific data that the Products as a whole (and not just ingredients) can deliver this benefit. The Manufacturer also needs to show beyond any doubt as to how the final Product, with the levels of incorporation of the ingredients, when used as per the Instruction for Use as given on the product packaging, can deliver the benefit of reducing hair fall. We strongly believe that such a benefit cannot be achieved from the Product, and the claim is therefore blatantly false and misleading the entire consumer community as a whole. It is urged that the Manufacturer is clearly making very tall and misleading claims with respect to its Products. It is pertinent to note that in the garb of manufacturing ayurvedic products, a Manufacturer cannot be permitted to make unsubstantiated claims. However, for a wash off product that is applied for a few minutes on the hair to make such tall claims is inconceivable”. "

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the product packaging and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser argues that Company’s product, falls under the category of “Surfactant Based Shampoos”, the guidelines of which are provided in IS 7884:2004. Also, there are no statutory guidelines that declare that shampoos or “wash-off products” cannot provide the benefits as endorsed. Advertiser submitted product licence copy and indicated that they would require two months to submit clinical report / efficacy data of this product. The CCC viewed the product packaging and concluded that in the absence of any evidence for the efficacy of the product, the claim of alleviating “hair fall, hair breakage and dryness” was not substantiated and is misleading. The product packaging contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY: "Piramal Enterprises Ltd "
PRODUCT: "Saridon"

COMPLAINT:

"“Saridon ad in Mumbai mirror newspaper in the films review section show that one needs to take 1 Saridon tablet for even a good film that is given 4 star rating by the newspaper.” My complaint regarding Saridon, which is a medicine for headache was due to its wrong suggestion in that a movie goer should take Saridon tablet after watching a movie that is not rated 5 Stars. Consider this: If the movie is rated as 1 Star - the ad suggests to take 4 Saridon tablets If the movie is rated as 2 Star - the ad suggests to take 3 Saridon tablets If the movie is rated as 3 Star - the ad suggests to take 2 Saridon tablets If the movie is rated as 4 Star - the ad suggests to take 1 Saridon tablets It is well know fact that rarely a movie is rated 5 out of 5 (may be 1 or 2 movies in a whole year). This is the only case in which the ad suggests that there is no need to take Saridon tablet. As you would be aware that most good movies are rated 3 or 4 (out of 5 stars), in which case the ad suggests that watching such movies triggers headache for every viewer and they should take Saridon tablets as per the above equation. The ad also suggests that in case the movie is rated 1 (i.e. poor), one needs to take 4 Saridon Tablets after watching it. Taking 4 tablets together for headache can be very harmful for anyone, causing medical emergency. It is very irresponsible for the company to link the consumption of the headache medicine with the rating of a movie and is adverse to public health and safety.” "

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION:NOT UPHELD

"The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser states that the print advertisement of Saridon talks about a headache that individuals may get after watching some movies. Headache is creatively represented with Saridon tablet in the advertisement. Hence, the advertisement is called "Filmi Headache Meter". The association of a movie's quality with a headache is a creative metaphor. The number of Saridon tablets is a creative visualization of reviewer's point of view (rating) on the movie. In the context of the advertisement being presented as part of a movie review, the CCC did not consider the advertisement to be in contravention of the ASCI code. The complaint was NOT UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY:"Godrej Consumer Products Limited"
PRODUCT: "Godrej Expert Rich Crème Hair Color"

COMPLAINT:

"The No ammonia Formula Keeps Hair damage Free"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

“In the aforesaid pack shot, the advertiser makes the absolute claim, “The No Ammonia Formula Keeps Hair damage Free”. We submit that the "The No ammonia Formula Keeps Hair damage Free" is an exaggerated, misleading and absolute claim for a Hair Dye product. We request the manufacturer to provide substantial scientific data to prove that the use of this product (short-term and prolonged) would "keep hair damage free". In absence of such data, it is frivolous and deceiving to claim "No ammonia formula keeps hair damage free" to the gullible consumers.”

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the product packaging and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser argues that the product has been evaluated by testing the tensile strength of the hair tresses measured in terms of the break load index value and submitted a summary of an in house test. The advertiser states that it has been observed that break load index of 0.98 obtained with Godrej Expert Crème Hair Colour is not statistically different from that of the control tresses. Also, Ammonia Based Crème Hair Colour has break load index of 0.87 which is found have statistically significant difference as compared to the control hair tresses as well as the Godrej Expert Rich Crème Hair Colour tresses. This shows that the strength of hair reduced, after usage of Ammonia Based Crème Hair Colour. However details of the test methodology, protocol and sample treatment etc were not submitted by the advertiser. Also, there was no rationale provided about the uniqueness of product composition and it’s mechanism of action to support as to how this formula does not cause any hair damage as claimed. The CCC acknowledged that although the advertiser’s product could be less invasive or damaging as compared to Ammonia based hair colours, the claim of “damage free” was absolute and was not adequately substantiated nor was it qualified. The claim was misleading by ambiguity. The product packaging contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY:"Gopal Corporation "
PRODUCT: "Tat-O Chips-Man Coffin"

COMPLAINT:

"The advertisement is a horror item under the title "Tat-o chips khate raho dharate raho" and telecast on Cartoon channel Pogo. Cartoon channels are for children. My child aged 4 year start crying when he saw this advertisement. Plz do the needful to stop this Tato Advertisement. "

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION:NOT UPHELD

"The CCC viewed the TVC and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser argues that the main intent of the TV commercials were to humorously showcase a ghost attempting to scare a group of kids but the kids in tum scare him/her off using the 'Halloween themed toys' which are part of "Darate Raho" pack. The campaign has been well received across all age groups. The CCC concluded that in the context of the advertisement showing children overcoming their fears, the TVC is humorous and not in contravention of the ASCI code. The complaint was NOT UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY:"Gopal Corporation "
PRODUCT: "Tat-O Chips-Woman Ghost"

COMPLAINT:

"Tat-O khate raho darate raho ad shows ghost frightening children's. Tat-O khate raho darate raho ad shows ghost frightening children's which is horrible for children's. My kid of 3yrs after watching this ad was crying for an hour. Even in night she was waking up crying. This is not good content to show on kids channel. Need to be removed. "

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION:NOT UPHELD

"The CCC viewed the TVC and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser argues that the main intent of the TV commercials were to humorously showcase a ghost attempting to scare a group of kids but the kids in tum scare him/her off using the 'Halloween themed toys', which are part of new "Darate Raho" pack. The campaign has been well received across all age groups. The CCC concluded that in the context of the advertisement showing children overcoming their fears, the TVC is humorous and not in contravention of the ASCI code. The complaint was NOT UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY: "Patanjali Ayurved Limited "
PRODUCT: "Patanjali Kacchi Ghani mustard oil"

COMPLAINT:

"The advertisement bears the statements: “Other than Kacchi Ghani process most of the other edible refined oils and mustard oil are made using Neurotoxin Hexagon Solvent extraction process, to make profits at cost of consumers’ health, many companies mix cheap palm oil in mustard oil. According to NCBI (US institute) Hexagon solvent which is a petroleum by-product is carcinogenic in nature.” Firstly, the term used by them viz. “Hexagon solvent extraction process”. The term is spelled wrongly. The process is called hexane solvent extraction process‟ where food grade hexane is the name of the petroleum solvent employed in the process of extracting oil from oilseed using this process. As is known, solvent extraction process is approved under FSSAI for extraction of oil from oilseeds, oilcake, rice bran and other oil bearing materials. The process of hexane solvent extraction is very well recognized and approved as laid down in regulation 2.2.1 of the Food Safety and Standards (Food Product Standards and Food Additives) Regulation, 2011. The solvent „hexane‟ (food grade) is approved for use in the extraction of edible oils. The Bureau of Indian Standards has formulated a standard for the food grade hexane which is IS 3470: 2002 in line with the WHO specifications for food grade hexane. World over soybean, rapeseed, sunflower seed and all other oilseeds process through solvent extraction using food grade hexane and then refined to make it fit for human consumption. The process using food grade hexane is approved by all the authorities. In addition to all this, there is also a limit specified under the food regulation for hexane residue content of maximum 5 ppm in the extracted oil. Needless to say that a process which is approved under law with all due considerations is very much safe and does not pose any harm nor health concern to the human being. Secondly, the statement made in their advertisement that “To make profits at the cost of consumers’ health many companies mix cheap palm oil with mustard oil is not of the good taste”. The oil industry is a responsible industry and manufacturers take utmost care towards compliance to the regulatory as well as quality and safety requirements for the oil they supply to the consumer. Also, M/s. Patanjali Ayurved Ltd., in the advertisement states that “India imports palm oil, soybean oil, sunflower oil and most of the refined oils from foreign countries there by draining wealth into foreign hands”. As you are aware of the factual position; India is forced to import edible oils to bridge the gap between demand and supply because it is not in position to produce sufficient edible oils to feed the population. This is the need of hour and saying that “draining of foreign exchange” is far from truth. The advertisement is unnecessarily misleading the consumer and also derogatory and denigrating to the oil industry”. "

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The CCC noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date. The CCC viewed the print advertisement. The CCC noted that two similar complaints received against TVC and print advertisement were deliberated by the CCC wherein the Advertiser could not substantiate their claims. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “Other than Kacchi Ghani process most of the other edible refined oils and mustard oil are made using Neurotoxin Hexagon Solvent extraction process, to make profits at cost of consumers’ health, many companies mix cheap palm oil in mustard oil” was not substantiated and the claims are misleading by gross exaggeration. The statement also unfairly denigrates other oils / mustard oil. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1, I.4 and IV.1 (e) of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY: "Vaidban Ayurved Bhawan’s "
PRODUCT: "Kamri Slimming Green Tea"

COMPLAINT:

“Kamri Slimming Green Tea – Keeps you slim and smart always.”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"This claim needs to be substantiated with necessary support data "

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The CCC noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date. The CCC viewed the TVC. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser and any evidence for the efficacy of the product, the CCC concluded that the claim, “Kamri Slimming Green Tea – Keeps you slim and smart always”, was not substantiated and is misleading by exaggeration. The TVC contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY:"Career Point Education Services (P) Ltd "
PRODUCT: "BHU B.Com Selections"

COMPLAINT:

"• “101 BHU B.Com selections” • “10 out of top 10” • “20 out of 20” • “45 out of 50” • “83 out of 100” • “which year or exam” • “Published Boy’s Selection in Girl’s Colleges” • “Are Not Mentioning the Source or the Survey” "

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"“CL (Career Launcher Varanasi), Varanasi distributed pamphlets outside exam centres which is claiming that CL Varanasi in its BHU Bcom pamphlet and advertisement claiming 101 BHU Bcom selections. Also 10 out of top 10 as well as 20 out of 20 + 45 out of 50 and 83 out of 100. This is totally misguiding info as it hasn't been mentioned which year or exam etc. They have also published boys' selection is girls colleges. How can they say that until substantiated by some survey. THE COMPLAINT IS THE CLAIMS MADE HERE ARENT MENTIONING THE SOURCE OR THE SURVEY AND ARE HIGHLY MISLEADING.” "

RECOMMENDATION:NOT UPHELD

"The CCC viewed the Ad – promotional pamphlet and considered the Advertiser’s response for Review. The advertiser had accepted that the claims “10 out of top 10”, “20 out of 20”,“45 out of 50”, “83 out of 100” and Publishing Boy’s Selection in Girl’s Colleges was an error by the Printer. Complaint against this claims continues to be UPHELD. For the claims, “101 BHU B.Com selections”, the advertiser sought a review and provided CA’s clarification letter on Caveats, a new CA certificate without caveats, and internal verified chart of students. Based on this data, the CCC concluded that the claim is substantiated. The complaint against the claim “101 BHU B.Com selections” was NOT UPHELD on review. "

 

COMPANY:"Coverfox Insurance Broking Pvt. Ltd "
PRODUCT: "Coverfox.com Online Vehicle Insurance"

COMPLAINT:

"“The TV ad ( Pinku) shows an online vehicle insurance being taken (literally) 5 seconds before the vehicle (supposedly) meets with an accident! Would insurance companies honour such claims made by people who bought online policies from coverfox.com, just 5 seconds before an accident? If not, then the TVC is misleading the people into believing that their claims will be honoured!” "

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION:NOT UPHELD

"The CCC viewed the TVC (Pinku) and considered the Advertiser’s response for Review. Advertiser argues that they are an IRDA licensed online insurance broking company and have entered into legal agreement with all top insurance companies to sell/renew their respective policies online via our portal. As claim support data for Review, the advertiser has submitted letters from 4 insurance companies confirming that the policy renewal is feasible online (Bharati AXA General Insurance Company, Future Generali Total Insurance Solutions, HDFC ERGO General Insurance, L&T Insurance). Also, the TVC portrays only instant online renewal of policy. Based on this support data, the CCC concluded that the TVC was not misleading. The complaint was NOT UPHELD on review. "

 

COMPANY: "Coverfox Insurance Broking Pvt. Ltd. "
PRODUCT: "Coverfox.com Online Vehicle Insurance"

COMPLAINT:

"“The TV ad (Burger) shows an online vehicle insurance being taken (literally) 5 seconds before the vehicle (supposedly) meets with an accident! Would insurance companies honour such claims made by people who bought online policies from coverfox.com, just 5 seconds before an accident? If not, then the TVC is misleading the people into believing that their claims will be honoured!” "

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION:NOT UPHELD

"The CCC viewed the TVC (Burger) and considered the Advertiser’s response for Review. Advertiser argues that they are an IRDA licensed online insurance broking company and have entered into legal agreement with all top insurance companies to sell/renew their respective policies online via our portal. As claim support data for Review, the advertiser has submitted letters from 4 insurance companies confirming that the policy renewal is feasible online (Bharati AXA General Insurance Company, Future Generali Total Insurance Solutions, HDFC ERGO General Insurance, L&T Insurance). Also, the TVC portrays only instant online renewal of policy. Based on this support data, the CCC concluded that the TVC was not misleading. The complaint was NOT UPHELD on review. "

 

COMPANY: "Coverfox Insurance Broking Pvt. Ltd. "
PRODUCT: "Coverfox.com Online Vehicle Insurance"

COMPLAINT:

"“The TV ad (Maa) shows an online vehicle insurance being taken (literally) 5 seconds before the vehicle (supposedly) meets with an accident! Would insurance companies honour such claims made by people who bought online policies from coverfox.com, just 5 seconds before an accident? If not, then the TVC is misleading the people into believing that their claims will be honoured!” "

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION:NOT UPHELD

"The CCC viewed the TVC (Maa) and considered the Advertiser’s response for Review. Advertiser argues that they are an IRDA licensed online insurance broking company and have entered into legal agreement with all top insurance companies to sell/renew their respective policies online via our portal. As claim support data for Review, the advertiser has submitted letters from 4 insurance companies confirming that the policy renewal is feasible online (Bharati AXA General Insurance Company, Future Generali Total Insurance Solutions, HDFC ERGO General Insurance, L&T Insurance). Also, the TVC portrays only instant online renewal of policy. Based on this support data, the CCC concluded that the TVC was not misleading. The complaint was NOT UPHELD on review. "

 

COMPANY: "Eureka Forbes Ltd"
PRODUCT: "Dr. Aquaguard Water Purifier"

COMPLAINT:

""I enclose herewith a leaflet being distributed by the company Eureka Forbes for their Aquaguard range of water purifiers in Vadodara. My objections are as follows: 1. Company says – Paani ka Doctor, Dr Aquaguard. My objection is their use of the word “Dr”. They can call their product ‘Paani ka Doctor’, I have no objection. But ‘Dr Aquaguard’ is objectionable. ‘Dr’ has a specific and designated meaning and qualified and registered people can use it before their name. Aquaguard is a machine, may be it has the capacity to remove the impurities from water, but it cannot become ‘Dr Aquaguard’. Let them call ‘Aquaguard- Paani Ka Doctor’. I say this because on P-2 under the heading ‘The power of Dr Aquaguard Magna, a white coat dressed person is shown as a ‘Doctor’ holding a glass of water and alongside is the sign of Rx, just as a medical practitioner writes, Rx in prescription. Under the photograph it is explained- Dr. Aquaguard, the water expert, is as qualified as a doctor, when it comes to prescribing a water purification solution, and a man who knows what water means to life. Aquaguard is no man, but machine and has no sense of judgement as a medical practitioner, it can only judge according to what is fed on its computer chip. 2. The next line reads- Every water purifier that Dr. Aquaguard, prescribes such as the one you have, is prescribed after rigorous analysis of a water type and accurate diagnosis of its condition. It is customised purification solution that’s designed to deliver you more than shuddh, healthy, water to protect your family’s health. The word ‘customized’ is a misnomer. There are 3 models (P.6)- UV, HD RO / HD Green RO, HD RO + UV and that fits to all people’s requirements, there is no customization. Again there conditions – Input water TDS ideal upto 500mg /litre (maxi), 500-2000mg/litre (max), 2000mg/litre (max) and if it is not, then recovery rate will be affected and TDS rejection. 3. Under the heading ‘The Dr. Aquaguard Advantage (p.6) company says – Trust of over 100 lakh mothers, owned by over 1.62 lakh doctors, sold in over 35 countries worldwide, endorsed by the Indian Medical Academy, certified by over 130 leading national and international laboratories. These are all tall claims to lure the customers. For every statement company needs to give substantiate proof. 4. On p.3, under Biotron, company mentions – The cutting edge Biotron Technology magnetises and de-clusters water molecules, to make the water more bio-available, by unlocking the nutrients in water. This looks fine to read but it is difficult to accept in principle. “Magnetising water to de-cluster water molecules to make water more bio-available by unlocking the nutrients in water”- this needs proof-solid proof of experimental evidence. Not wordly statements as if explaining to a layman. Kindly look into the above objections, call for company’s reply and decide on my complaint. Kindly keep me informed. " "

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

""The advertiser representatives were given personal hearing by ASCI. For many of the claims that hold for the mother brand “Aquaguard”, the advertiser indicated that they would make necessary modifications in the advertisement. However they requested that nevertheless, the CCC should should review the data for acceptability for the motherbrand. The claim support data for Review was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC viewed the Ad – promotional leaflet and considered the Advertiser’s response as well as opinion of the Technical expert presented at the meeting. Claim - “endorsed by the Indian Medical Academy” was not part of the review as the complaint against this claim was NOT UPHELD. Claim – “Dr. Aquaguard Magna – Paani ka Doctor” The complainant has not objected to the description “Paani ka doctor” but has a complaint against the prefix of “Dr”. Advertiser states that the Registrar of Trade Marks has accepted their application under the Trade Marks Act 1999 and by virtue of this, they are legally entitled to use the trademark Dr. Aquaguard. Advertiser acknowledged that all mentions of Dr. Aquaguard should be in conjunction to 'TM' or 'R' as the case may be to signify trademark / registered trademark and we shall abide by this in all related mentions. The CCC accepted this submission by the advertiser and did not find the reference of “Dr Aquaguard” objectionable provided it is qualified with 'TM' or 'R' as the case may be. In absence of this qualifier consistently throughout the Promotional material, the advertisement was misleading by omission and in contravention of Chapter I.4 of the ASCI code. The complaint stands UPHELD on review. Claim – “It is customised purification solution that’s designed to deliver you more than shuddh, healthy, water to protect your family’s health”. The advertiser justifies their claim stating that they recommend a water purifier to their customer based on the customer’s water type and this is recommendation of a specific variant based on the location of the consumer. The advertiser clarifies that the customization is therefore not in the manner of “personalization” of product as per the consumer’s want but the offering of a product based on customer’s needs based on input water condition and location. The CCC noted that Dr Aquaguard Magna has variants such as UV, RO, RO +UV which are standard “variants” and the advertiser is offering these product variants with different features for the customer to choose from as a broad product offering as per industry norms. The advertisement’s argument as part of review does not address the issue of “personalization per customer as per his / her needs basis the water quality he / she receives” – which is customization as is generally understood by consumers in the context of the description provided in the brochure. The CCC concluded that the use of the word ‘customized’ in the context of the advertisement (without reference to only the specific variants) in the description is therefore misleading by ambiguity. The Ad – leaflet contravened Chapter I.4 of the ASCI Code. This complaint stands UPHELD on review. The advertiser has acknowledged that the product brochure is for the product Dr Aquaguard Magna; however under the headline “Dr Aquaguard advantage” many of the claims are meant for the mother brand “Aquaguard”. Claim – “Trust of over 100 lakh mothers” – The advertiser provided evidence that a number of publications, have awarded 'Aquaguard ' the accolade of ""Most Trusted Brand"" such as “The Economic Times -Best Brands”, The Readers ' Digest -Most Trusted Brands, Superbrands India. The results of Usage & Attitude Studies (U&A) conducted for the water purification category by reputed market research agencies have indicated high category scores in the excess of 70% for the Brand Aquaguard on 'Trust' and 'Likeability'. The CCC acknowledged that the motherbrand “Aquaguard” did have support data on “Trust” parameters but such data was not available for the product being advertised i.e. Dr. Aquaguard Magna. This claim was not substantiated and was misleading by ambiguity. The Ad – leaflet contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. This complaint stands UPHELD on review. Claim - “owned by over 1.62 lakh doctors” – The advertiser clarifies that the claim is based on actual sales effected by EFL for this purpose. The few dummy entries which were found in the Register were required to be made only for the limited purpose of effectively migrating the data in 2006/2007 from EFL's old accounting software to new accounting software (viz. SAP software). Even post removing / adjusting the dummy entries, it was found that more than 1,64 lakh doctors have purchased and own Aquaguard machines. The CCC acknowledged that the advertiser has provided the certificate for the motherbrand “Aquaguard” and substantiated the claim, this data does not correspond to the product being advertised i.e. Dr. Aquaguard. This claim was not substantiated for Dr. Aquaguard Magna and was misleading by ambiguity. The Ad – leaflet contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. This complaint stands UPHELD on review. Claim - “sold in over 35 countries worldwide” – The advertiser states that Eureka Forbes Ltd. has a network of distributors in over 35 countries as subsidiaries and joint ventures. By virtue of their acquisition of Lux International the number of countries where they sell their products has gone beyond 35 countries. However the CCC noted that the advertiser did not provide evidence for the claim for the advertised product Dr Aquaguard Magna or Aquaguard. This claim was not substantiated and was misleading by ambiguity. The Ad – leaflet contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. This complaint stands UPHELD on review. Claim - “certified by over 130 leading national and international laboratories” – The advertiser states that they have support of Certificate issued by the independent Chartered Accountant that 131 national and international institutions have tested and certified the product 'Aquaguard' and this can used in respect of 'Dr. Aquaguard Magna', since the latter is a part of the larger brand 'Aquaguard '. The CCC noted that the data for certification was not available for the product being advertised “Dr. Aquaguard Magna”. The reference of “certified” was considered to be ambiguous as it was not apparent what the certification was for (i.e. nature of each certification could be different). This claim was not substantiated and was misleading by ambiguity. The Ad – leaflet contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. This complaint stands UPHELD on review. Claim ""magnetis(es) water to de-cluster water molecules to make water more bio-available by unlocking the nutrients in water"" The advertiser argues that the claim is a scientific claim and is subject to the scientifically valid experimental ‘clinical evidence’ when the claim itself is non-clinical. Only curative or therapeutic claims of the type, pharmaceutical companies make are clinical in nature and must be held to a clinical evidence standard. The advertiser provides reference to experiments in plant and animal cell membrane. The CCC noted that the advertisement has reference to Biotron technology and has direct reference to the technology unlocking nutrients to make them more bioavailable to humans (e.g. “… helping your body absorb them better”). The CCC noted that one of the references submitted by the advertiser says in its Conclusions (Chapter 5) that ""no conclusive results have proved the effectiveness"" of magnetic treatment. There was no proof of the technology being effective for humans nor any data to indicate extrapolation of plants and animal studies in humans. In absence of such data, the CCC concluded that the claim was not substantiated and was considered to be misleading by ambiguity and omission. The Ad – leaflet contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. This complaint stands UPHELD on review. " "

 

COMPANY:"Philips Electronics India Ltd. "
PRODUCT: "Philips Lifemax Plus"

COMPLAINT:

"“Upto 10 years life” "

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"Packing says upto 10 years life. I use these tubes but I have found they do not last more than one year though I use them for not more than 4 hours on an average per day. I am attaching herewith an image of product packaging. Company may argue the use of term by it ""upto 10 years life"" does not mean a product will last 10 years. My point is the actual life of the product should have some relation with the advertised life of the product which is not in the present case. "

RECOMMENDATION:NOT UPHELD

"The claim support data for Review was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC viewed the product packaging and considered the Advertiser’s response as well as the opinion of the Technical expert presented at the meeting. Advertiser argues that their product’s life is 21000 hours which is substantiated by their internal test report. As claim support data for Review, the Advertiser provided a copy of this test repost and a copy of the BIS certificate for their TL lamps. The CCC noted that as per the BIS:IS2418 (part 1):1977 amendment 7 of Oct 2010, it is necessary to test and mark the product or its packaging with a "rated life" value based on a statistical test performed on a group of lamps with a specified voltage and tolerance applied, and a specified on-off switching sequence applied. As per the test report, the test is still ongoing in real-time mode at > 16,500 hours and statistical analysis indicates that the life of a fraction of the lamps is indeed likely to reach 21,000 hours. Like some other measures of performance, this life obtained is under tightly controlled laboratory conditions and in actual practice, the life would vary depending on factors such as the voltage quality. The CCC concluded that the claim is substantiated. The complaint stands NOT UPHELD on review. "

 

COMPANY: "Chemical Resources "
PRODUCT: "Chemforce Capsules"

COMPLAINT:

“Chemforce Overall Energy & Vitality”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"Chemforce Capsules Product Is Being Promoted For "Over All Energy & Vitality". The Active Ingredient Furosap Is Still Undergoing Clinical Trial By “Clinical Trials Gov", Mother Of All Clinical Trials & Its Eligibility Criteria Specifically Mentions, "Diagnosed With Symptomatic Hypogonadism”. To Promote Such Specific Product For All Men Is Highly Unethical & Unwarranted "

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

"The advertiser representatives were given personal hearing by ASCI wherein the advertiser informed that the advertised product is a Food item. 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. Advertiser states that from the on-going clinical study being carried out on 100 subjects, one clinical study on 50 subjects has already been completed under the Title “ASSESS THE EFFICACY OF FUROSAP®, A TESTOSTERONE BOOSTER SUPPLEMENT, IN HUMAN VOLUNTEERS: An Add-On Study”. The overall energy and vitality is with respect to healthy testosterone levels. As claim support data, Advertiser submitted a copy of this clinical study. The CCC concluded that the claim “Overall energy and vitality” was supported through the Clinical trial. This complaint was NOT UPHELD. However, CCC expressed their concern for promotion of this “food” product with claim “one capsule daily” addressed to all men. The product is meant for “treatment of symptomatic hypogonadism” as a “testosterone booster”. The safety of the product for its long term use was not substantiated. The advertisement was misleading by ambiguity and omission and encouraged negligence. It contravened Chapter I.1, I.4 and III.3 of the ASCI Code. This complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY: "Cheil India P. Ltd"
PRODUCT: "Samsung 5-in-1 Refrigerator"

COMPLAINT:

"Claims made on website: 1. 185 litres of extra fridge space with just the push of a button, the freezer turns into a fridge whenever you want. So no space is no issue anymore. 2. 75% energy savings With the Digital Inverter Technology you get about 54% energy saving. And, an additional 21% when you convert the freezer into a fridge. 3. 31% faster cooling Even on hot summer days, the Power Cool feature ensures your refrigerator cools faster by up to 31% 4. 31% faster ice making Never run out of ice cubes. With just the push of a button, Power Freeze ensures youll have ice cubes anytime. 5. Moist fresh zone It stores your vegetables and fruits at an optimal humidity level by releasing moisture cyclically, so they stay fresh longer. 6. Sterilises the air inside your refrigerator stays clean and hygienic, thanks to a filter on the fan that sterilises air passing through it. "

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

""Description of the TVC: The TVC (copy attached) shows a boy describing the wonderful refrigerator at his home to his friends. He tells them how before they go on a vacation, his mother converts the fridge portion also into a freezer. On another occasion, when his father brought home plenty of fruits his mother converted the freezer portion into a fridge. Again, when his father was alone, she made the fridge small! When his friends look disbelieving, he takes them home. His mother explains that there are five modes the fridge can work on: normal, seasonal, vacation, extra fridge and home alone. So it is 1 fridge for 5 needs. Claims made on website: 1. 185 litres of extra fridge space with just the push of a button, the freezer turns into a fridge whenever you want. So no space is no issue anymore. 2. 75% energy savings With the Digital Inverter Technology you get about 54% energy saving. And, an additional 21% when you convert the freezer into a fridge. 3. 31% faster cooling Even on hot summer days, the Power Cool feature ensures your refrigerator cools faster by up to 31% 4. 31% faster ice making Never run out of ice cubes. With just the push of a button, Power Freeze ensures youll have ice cubes anytime. 5. Moist fresh zone It stores your vegetables and fruits at an optimal humidity level by releasing moisture cyclically, so they stay fresh longer. 6. Sterilises the air inside Your refrigerator stays clean and hygienic, thanks to a filter on the fan that sterilises air passing through it. Our objections: 1. What is Digital Inverter Technology? Is it unique to this brand? If not, then the claim is misleading by omission. 2. When you say 31% faster cooling and 31% faster ice making faster than what? 3. How do the Power Cool and Power Freeze features work? Are they unique to this brand? If not, then the claims are misleading by omission. 4. With reference to claims 5 and 6, are these features unique to this brand? If not, then the claims are misleading by omission. 5. Can Samsung substantiate all these claims made with independent studies? The disclaimer on the website says: Result based on Samsungs Internal Lab Test conditions. Results may vary depending on different test conditions. This is not sufficient proof. Data from external, independent studies are needed as proof. 6. Another disclaimer in small print says: Available in select models with Power Freeze & Power Cool only. It should be made clear to the consumer whether the model he is considering buying has these features. ""

RECOMMENDATION:NOT UPHELD

"The advertiser was granted an extension of six days to the standard lead time of seven days to submit their reply as a special case as they were in the midst of transition. The advertiser representatives were given personal hearing by ASCI. The claim support data was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC noted that the claims objected to, were not part of the TVC. The CCC viewed the website advertisement, considered the Advertiser’s response as well as opinion of the Technical expert presented at the meeting. The CCC observed that the Web-site advertisement had disclaimers for claims made therein, which were considered to be acceptable. The CCC also opined that advertiser could have internal claim support based on their industry expertise and in-house capability. The acceptability of such data is determined on scrutiny. Further, the advertisement did not claim “uniqueness” of its features or technology. Complaint regarding the objections raised on these points was NOT UPHELD. Regarding quantitative claims made on the website, the advertiser provided adequate evidence, in the form of detailed in-house reports. The 75% savings in energy is substantiated by the test report comparison between a 3 star 2016 model vs a 1 star 2016 model. This complaint was NOT UPHELD. The claims “31% faster cooling”, “31% faster ice making” when ""power freeze"" is enabled were substantiated. This complaint was NOT UPHELD. Claims “Moist fresh zone”, “Sterilizes the air inside – your refrigerator stays clean and hygienic, thanks to a filter on the fan that sterilizes air passing through” were substantiated. This complaint was NOT UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY:"Hindustan Unilever Ltd"
PRODUCT:"Fair & lovely Ayurvedic Care"

COMPLAINT:

"1. Naisargik anti-oxidants chya shaktine samridh ji vran hatavne. 2. Ek naisargik astringent tvachela shanti dete ani mukhti milvun dete. 3. Parinam hey clinical/invasive skin treatment barobariche nastil. Cosmetic domain madhil treatment chya sandharbat. "

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"4. Naisargik anti-oxidants chya shaktine samridh ji vran hatavne. 5. Ek naisargik astringent tvachela shanti dete ani mukhti milvun dete. 6. Parinam hey clinical/invasive skin treatment barobariche nastil. Cosmetic domain madhil treatment chya sandharbat. Reasons for objection- 1. The disclaimrs 1, 2 3 and lower line are deliberately printed in very small letter. 2. Shanti and mukhti is a very tall and false claim which cannot be proved. 3. These statements are so arranged that the ordinary user cannot understand its meaning. Because he will not know what is invasive treatment and cosmetic domain. As I have explained in the proforma, the advertisement contains vague statements 2 & 3 and also the disclaimer at bottom. These are deliberately printed in very small letters and the language is very slipper for e.g. what is the meaning of shanti and multi vis-a-vis a woman's hair. Similarly an ordinary consumer cannot understand the meaning of invasive treatment and cosmetic domain. The correction expected is bold type print” "

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. The claim support data was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response as well as opinion of the Technical expert presented at the meeting. Advertiser states that their product contains natural anti-oxidants like saffron (kesar) and component of Kumkumadi tailum such as Manjistha, Padmak, Chandan, etc which are well known to be anti-oxidants and complexion enhancing agents and effective on hyperpigmentation and marks. Advertiser provided references of these text books/grantha’s. Advertiser also provided a copy of consumer study conducted which shows 97% of consumers supported the fact that the product soothes skin, and 99% consumers agreed that the Product makes their skin calm. The CCC noted that the claims are based on ingredients that might have these properties at a particular level of dose in the composition in a particular form. Here the product which is based on a classical product ‘Kumkumadi taila’ is claimed to have these properties. Kumkumadi Taila meaning a formulation in oil form with Kumkum i.e. Keshar (Saffron) as the main ingredient is modified in different form, a cream form as in the product Fair & Lovely. The CCC noted that such data is not provided for the product and the consumer study only refers to the consumer perception. The CCC concluded that the claims in Marathi (when translated in English) “Power packed with natural anti-oxidants that removes scars”, “A natural astringent that calms the skin and provides freedom” were not substantiated and were misleading. The advertisement contravened Chapter I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI code. This complaint was UPHELD. The CCC did not consider the disclaimer to be relevant in the context of the claims. "

 

COMPANY:"United Group of Institutions(United Institute Of Management) "
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“100% Placement”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"This claim needs to be substantiated with necessary support data "

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser argues that they have an excellent dedicated placement cell which serve the students and try to get best placement for students. The CCC concluded that the claim, “100% Placement” was not substantiated with details of the actual batch size of students, their list with details and evidence of their placement. Also, the claim is misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY: "Satya Automobiles "
PRODUCT:"Savings offer on Maruti Suzuki Cars"

COMPLAINT:

"“Bring any make, Any model in any condition and get minimum Rs. 85000/- of your old car.” “Total savings upto 57100/- on wagon R” "

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"The ad claims, 1. Bring any make, Any model in any condition and get minimum Rs. 85000/- of your old car. 2. Total savings upto 57100/- on wagon R. Both these points are misguiding and not adhered to. Hence it is the content of the advertisement which is the source of confusion in our case. The Product is valued as high and discount announced whereas it is billed much less and no benefit passed for old vehicle value or the concession so reffred. Hence all the fudge is due to the illusionary advertisement. I request you to address my complaint towards the fraudulent practice of advertising and take strong action and save people from being misguided. "

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims in the Ad, “Bring any make, Any model in any condition and get minimum Rs. 85000/- of your old car”, and “Total savings upto 57100/- on wagon R”, were not substantiated and are misleading by omission of appropriate disclaimers. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY:"Flipkart Internet Pvt Ltd- "
PRODUCT:"Air Wick Automative Spray Rose Liquid Air Freshener"

COMPLAINT:

“100% Original Products”, “Flipkart Matlab Bikul Paka”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

“The flipkart ad says they sale only genuine products. I purchased a product which is 100 percent fake. They have accepted it as fake as well. Flipkart sells fake product to customers. They also said me that they have blacklisted the supplier as far as providing the sample to you than I may state that I have mailed the concerned company ie Reckitt Benckiser and they will conduct their own investigation.”

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

"The advertiser was granted an extension of five days to the standard lead time of five days to submit their reply in response to their request for extension. The CCC viewed the TVC and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser states that the customer’s allegation that the Product is fake has been accepted by them. The genuineness of the Product is being investigated and the concerned seller has been kept pending till the conclusion of such investigation. The advertiser argues that their web-site is an online market place platform where buyers and sellers come together to conduct the commercial activity of buying and selling. It is the seller who decides as to which product he/ it would like to sell online and after complying with all of Flipkart requisite rules and regulations of the Website, puts up the details of the product on the product listing page. They are therefore an “intermediary” and hence the Complainant’s statement that they sell fake products cannot stand. Advertiser admits that the genuineness of the Product is being investigated into and the concerned seller has been kept pending till the conclusion of such investigation. The advertiser says that they cannot comment on the genuineness of the product till an investigation to probe into the issue is concluded. The CCC noted that the Flipkart advertisement promises “100% original products” “Flipkart matlab bilkul pakka” and this assurance is being provided by Flipkart as an advertiser. This is not an advertisement by any of the “seller”. While Flipkart assures prompt investigation and action in case of complaints, the CCC noted that Flipkart has no foolproof system or mechanism in place as an aggregator to prevent sale of fake products from their platform. The CCC concluded that the claims “100% original products”, “Flipkart matlab bilkul pakka” were not substantiated and were misleading by exaggeration. The TVC contravened Chapter I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY:"Utkal University "
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“Ten Glorious years with 100% Placement”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

“I have come across advertisement by the following educational institution harping on 100 % placement Utkal University , Bhubaneswar Odisha -Ten Glorious years with 100% Placement. I enclose copies of the above advertisement and request for necessary action.”

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response denying that they have release any advertisement in “The Sronaja” and did not respond to ASCI query of the advertisement referred to in “The Samaja” . The CCC viewed the print advertisement and concluded that the claim, “Ten Glorious years with 100% Placement”, was not substantiated with details of the actual batch size of students, their list with details and evidence of their placement. Also, the claim is misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY:"New Delhi Institute Of Management "
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“Consistent record of 100% finest placement”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

“New Delhi Institute Of Management , New Delhi ( published in the telegraph) - Consistent record of 100% finest placement” “I enclosed copies of the above advertisement and request for necessary action .”

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. As claim support data, the Advertiser provided – 1) copy of India’s Best B-school ‘Business World‘ Survey of 2013 where they have been ranked as 16th best in India, 2) copy of the b-school survey where they have been shown as 90% against other institutes, 3) Business India 2015 rankings where their average salary has been shown in S2 grade, 4) Business World ranking of 2014 where they have ranked 15th rank in Placements across the country. The CCC concluded that the claim, “Consistent record of 100% finest placement”, was not substantiated with relevant data (such as detailed list of students who have been placed through their Institute, contact details of students for verification, enrolment forms, the batch size of the students per year, and appointment letters received by the students) nor any independent audit or verification certificate. Also, the claim is misleading by gross exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Siddha Group "
PRODUCT: "Siddha Xanadu Studios Apartment "

COMPLAINT:

"“A first of its kind in the country, matching New York standard for studio apartments”, “Xanadu features the last word in technology to give you a home that is intelligent like you are.” "

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"Complaint: “We’re delighted to unveil to you the word of Xanadu… a magical place that’ll take your breath aways, as it has ours. A result of meticulous research and tireless innovation catering to the needs of the wireless generation, offering immaculate home studios, geared to take care of every need that you could have. A first of its kind in the country , matching New York standard for studio apartments, Xanadu features the last word in technology to give you a home that’s intelligent like you are.” I bought the apartment and have been duped. It does not match New York standards, it is a bare shell and has no technology , therefore the “ last word in technology” is false and misleading”. The statement “ a home that’s intelligent like you are” is patently false unless it is a sarcasm on the stupidity of the buyer. "

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date of response. The CCC viewed the website advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims in the Ad, “A first of its kind in the country, matching New York standard for studio apartments”, and “Xanadu features the last word in technology to give you a home that;s intelligent like you are”, were not substantiated and are misleading. There is no information as to which New York Standards for Studio apartment is the advertiser referring to and providing to its customers nor the details of the “intelligent / technology features” are being provided. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY:"Quikr India Pvt Ltd (Quikr) "
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“Get Quikr Free delivery”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"I came across your email address from www. Consumergrievance . com. It shows that any advertisement that is misleading, dishonested is to be reported to you. Thought to bring this to your notice. 2. Quikr is showing ‘ free delivery’ on its website (screenshot attached) to attract customers but once you start buying , they are adding Rs. 400 as shipping charge , which happen in my case. Moreover , they are charging Rs 400 to the seller also. 3. Before filing a case under Consumer protection act 1986 , thought you . I believe , it’s a wrong way to charge by advertising else. 4. This is for your information and necessarily action pleace "

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date of response. The CCC viewed the website advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim in the Ad, “Get Quikr Free delivery”, is false and misleading. The website advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY:"Rau’s IAS Study Circle "
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"• “8 in top 20” • “39 in top 100” • “396 Total Selections” "

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"“The claim of 8 in top 20 , 39 in top 100 and 396 total selection is far from true. Hope you will take action. Published: 3rd may 2016 , The Hindu , Hubbali edition.” "

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. The CCC concluded that the claims, “8 in top 20”, “39 in top 100”, and “396 Total Selections”, were not substantiated with supporting data and are misleading. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY:"Accelyst Solutions Pvt. Ltd "
PRODUCT: "Freecharge"

COMPLAINT:

"Complaint 1: Freecharge tv advertisement in a petrol station Use of mobile phone in the petrol station Complaint 2: FREE CHARGE -- an app which is promoting on satellite TV prime time 9 pm slot shows a teen age boy getting out of the car which is in a petrol pump to refill fuel. He geta a call on his cell in the PETROL PUMP PREMISES. He answers the call and starts conversation. This act of his is OBJECTIONABLE. On all petrol pumps in our country, there are sign boards -- PLS PUT OFF YOUR MOBILE IN THIS AREA. So How can the Brand promoting their product show this misleading thing. Complaint 3: Three men get out of a car at a Petrol bunk and one amongst them starts using a mobile phone while at the bunk and when petrol is being pumped in. USE of Mobile phone at Petrol bunks is a safety hazard and a big fire risk. Many petrol stations have put notices in this regard. Disregard to safety precaution is no way to promote a product. Complaint 4: Freecharge advertisement- A group of three friends at a petrol pump wherein one doesn't have money and hence the ad. Usage of mobile phone is discouraged at petrol pumps as it is dangerous. While the advertisement doesn't promote it, it still sends out wrong message "

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the TVC and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser argues that the idea was to make potential customers aware of the Split Bill feature on Freecharge. The CCC concluded that the scene in the TVC of a person using mobile phone inside the petrol pump premises, shows/encourages an unsafe practice. Also, as the visual itself is unacceptable, the proposed revision by the advertiser of adding a super was not considered to be appropriate. The TVC contravened Chapter III.3 of the Code. The complaints were UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY:"Chaturbhuj PharmaCompany "
PRODUCT: "Japani M & F "

COMPLAINT:

"Shokin log b istemal krke dekhe ??? Just 7 year old my brother ask me:- Bro what's this? M confused what reply I have to him?” Further, in addition, the visual in the advertisement implies that the product is meant for enhancement of sexual pleasure, which is in Breach of the law as it violates The Drugs & Magic Remedies Act. "

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date. The CCC viewed the advertisement showing a visual of a couple in an intimate pose and products Japani M for males and Japani F for females beig positioned to “enhanced pleasure of marital life” . In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim in the Ad (in Hindi), “Shokin log bhi istemal karke asar dekhe”, was not substantiated and is misleading by implication. Also, the claims related to the product benefit read in conjunction with the advertisement 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, I.4 and III.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY: "Askmebazaar.com "
PRODUCT:“Asus Zenfone 2 @ Rs 1435”

COMPLAINT:

"Asus Zenfone 2 @ rs 1435 on yahoo.com. An ad is placed by ask me bazaar that asus zenfone 2 is for 1435. When we click the ad, the cost of product is very much higher than the shown 1435. "

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date. The CCC viewed the website advertisement and also noted the price differential with the actual cost on the web-site. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim in the Ad, “Asus Zenfone 2 at Rs 1435”, was not substantiated and is grossly misleading. The website advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY: "Razorbill "
PRODUCT: "Razorslim1"

COMPLAINT:

“Razorslim – complete Ayurvedic way of losing fat most effectively without any side effect”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"It is observed that, you are advertising products such as ""RAZOR SLIM"", through your website httpilrazorbill.co.in. The advertisement about the Ayurvedic product ""RAZOR SLIM” contravene the provision of Act as given below: Sr.No - 1 Product: RAZOR SLIM Contravaining statement: Losing FAT Contravention Under Act: The Drugs & Magic Remedies (OA) Act, 1954 Contravaining provisions of Acts: Section 3(d) read with Schedule at Sr. No.38 and Section 4. On perusal of this advertisements, it is observed that ""RAZOR SLIM"" is suggested for reducing for obesity. Above information pertaining the above mentioned product is objectionable under the Act stated therein. The above information advertised by you, for products as mentioned above contravened various provision of the subject Act and Rules, You are therefore requested & directed to immediately stop the broadcasting of said advertisement through internet protocol in the larger interest of public. "

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “Razorslim – complete Ayurvedic way of losing fat most effectively without any side effect”, was not substantiated with clinical evidence or proof of efficacy for the product and is misleading. The visual showing the images of before and after the treatment were considered to be misleading The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY: "Razorbill "
PRODUCT: "Spondireliv"

COMPLAINT:

“A complete cure of Spondylitis with a unique herbal formula”.

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"It is observed that, you are advertising products such as ""SPONDIRELIV"", through your website http://razorbill.co.in. The advertisement about the Ayurvedic product ""SPONDIRELIV” contravene the provision of Act as given below: Product: SPONDIRELIV Contravaining statement: Cure Spondylitis Contravention Under Act: Drugs & Cosmetics Act, 1940 & Rules 1945 Contravaining provisions of Acts: Rule 106 r/w Schedule J at Sr.No 48 On perusal of this advertisements, it is observed that ""SPONDIRELIV"" is cure of spondylitis. Above information pertaining the above mentioned product is objectionable under the Act stated therein. The above information advertised by you, for products as mentioned above contravened various provision of the subject Act and Rules "

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “A complete cure of Spondylitis with a unique herbal formula”, was not substantiated with clinical evidence or proof of efficacy for the product and is misleading. Also, specific to the claim related to cure of Spondylitis, the Ad is in Breach of the law as it violated Schedule J of The Drugs and Cosmetic Act, 1940 and Rules, 1945. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1, I.4 and III.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Dr. Batras' Positive Health Clinic Pvt Ltd"
PRODUCT: "Hair Loss Treatment "

COMPLAINT:

"Dr Batra Add says, 1. Bald man does not get job 2. Bald man does not get accepted by girl and their family In their hair product add, they are putting above two data points in bold. Being a bald, I find this add as a question to my dignity. It is an insult to all balding men. It is ridiculing them, and making their status in society low. This add is racism against balding men. "

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims in the Ad, “41% of men with full heads of hair were selected for job interviews as compared to only 27% of balding men”, “56% of women think that men with hair loss look at least 5 years older than their actual age”, were not substantiated and are misleading. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY: "Dr Batra’s Homepathy Clinic "
PRODUCT: "Largest Hair Treatment Clinic"

COMPLAINT:

“World’s largest hair treatment clinic”, “Over 7 lakh hair loss patients successfully”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

“This Ad In TIME OF INDIA, NAGPUR EDITION, Dated 07/05/2016, On Page 3, Is About Hair Fall Treatment. Ad Claims That It is World’s Largest Hair Treatment Clinic. It Also Claims To Have treated Over 7 lac Hair Loss Patients “Successfully”. Both these Claims Re Without Any Data & Hence Misleading. Tribological Society, London Is Not A Recording Medical Institution.”

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims in the Ad, “World’s largest hair treatment clinic”, and “Over 7 lakh hair loss patients successfully”, were not substantiated and are misleading. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY:"Amazon India Pvt ltd (Shop Anytime, Anywhere) "
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"This is regarding Amazon India TV Commercial named “We Indians Love On-the-go! Shop Anytime, Anywhere on Amazon.in; which shows a distracted driver driving on a busy road. In the aforesaid TV commercial, the driver is seen eating, talking to other passenger and his concentration is clearly off the road. This TV commercial promotes unsafe driving practice and has high possibility to drive more people into road accidents knowingly or unknowingly.In the aforesaid TV commercial, the driver is seen eating, talking to other passenger and his concentration is clearly off the road. This TV commercial promotes unsafe driving practice and has high possibility to drive more people into road accidents knowingly or unknowingly. We request you to Stop this TV Commercial or edit it so that it gives a right message to masses along with fulfilling the commercial intent. We expect your urgent cooperation in taking the requested action to help make India a safer country. "

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION:NOT UPHELD

"The CCC viewed the TVC and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser’s states that the visual objected to is not promoting any dangerous practises nor it is the key focus of the advertisement and this depiction is so brief that it passes in the blink of an eye. The CCC concluded that this scene in the TVC showing the driver taking a bite of kulfi while driving is not in contravention of the ASCI Code. The complaint was NOT UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"LG India Pvt. Ltd. "
PRODUCT: "LG Water Purifiers"

COMPLAINT:

“Using Plastic Tank is injurious to health”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"“LG being the only true water purifier in India is false, misleading and unsubstantiated: “India’s only true water purifier by LG” and “Using Plastic Tank is injurious to health” The Advertiser’s claim is arbitrary without any basis to establish that true water purification is necessarily based on the features considered by the Advertiser. Therefore “India’s only true water purifier” claim of the Advertiser is a false claim as it is not only based on arbitrary criteria but there are also competition products which provide superior or parity pure/safe drinking water as required by a true water purifier. At the outset, the criteria of a stainless steel storage tank for true water purifier is misleading as the primary and ultimate objective of a water purifier is to provide the safe/ drinking water to the user/consumers and should be solely judged on the same rather than unnecessary cost intensive additional features not necessarily affecting the quality of drinking water. The Advertiser in the Advertisement has further claimed that using plastic tanks is injurious to health. Plastic tanks used in the products of the Complainant’s to store the purifier water are of a high quality food grade plastic (not ordinary plastic) not affecting the output water store and therefore the claim of such plastic tank being injurious to health is false and derogatory to the competition. The Advertiser’s selection of features necessary for a true water purifier and claim of use of plastic tanks by competition being injurious to health has no basis and should be put to strict proof. All the more, the Advertiser not only has to use a justified criteria of functionality of a water purifier, but also conduct an extensive comparative testing with all available competition products to establish that LG is the only such true water purifier. There are various competition products available in the market with superior filtration technology such as RO+UV than the Advertiser’s RO technology and can provide pure/safe drinking water to consumers and therefore qualify as true water purifiers. The Advertisers have used generic water purifier comparison to disparage the entire competition. We would like to draw your attention to the fact that the claim “Only true water purifier” of the Advertiser had earlier been challenged by the Complainant and was also upheld by the CCC under 1507-CCC.531 for being misleading and unsubstantiated, as attached herein as Annexure B. The current Advertisement featuring the same claim is a blatant non-compliance and total disregard of the aforementioned ASCI decision”. "

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date despite a reminder. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim in the Ad, “Using Plastic Tank is injurious to health”, was not substantiated and is misleading. Also, the claim unfairly denigrated the entire class/category of Plastic tanks. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1, I.4 and IV.1(e) of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY: "Razorbill "
PRODUCT:"Razor Slim Ayurvedic Instant Slimming Capsules"

COMPLAINT:

"1. The most exciting fastest fat burner of India is here. The New Razorslim an Ayurvedic fat buster has shaped millions of people across the country. 2. Razorslim has specifically chosen highly effective herbs which help reducing weight Razorslim has two types of capsules. No1 capsules help in removing fat from the body and No2 capsules help in evacuating the removed fat through excretory system. 3. Used By Millions To Lose Weight Fast. 4. Clinically Proven "

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims in the Ad, “The most exciting fastest fat burner of India is here. The New Razorslim an Ayurvedic fat buster has shaped millions of people across the country”, “Razorslim has specifically chosen highly effective herbs which help reducing weight”, “Razorslim has two types of capsules. No1 capsules help in removing fat from the body and No2 capsules help in evacuating the removed fat through excretory system”, “Used By Millions To Lose Weight Fast”, “Clinically Proven”, were not substantiated and are grossly misleading. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY: "Lotus Herbals Limited "
PRODUCT: "Lotus Safe Sun Whitening Plus"

COMPLAINT:

"SPF 40 , PA+++give complete sun protection from UVA /UVB rays”. "

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date despite a reminder. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim in the Ad, “SPF 40 , PA+++give complete sun protection from UVA /UVB rays”, was not substantiated and is misleading. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY: "L’Oreal India Limited"
PRODUCT: "New Garnier White Complete Double Action Facewash"

COMPLAINT:

"The TVC dialogues are as follows: You think only cream can give you physical fairness? Think again Garnier White Complete Double Action Facewash, enriched with lemon extract and white clay, in a unique double texture formula. This fights dark spots and gives instant whitening. Now fairness starts with a wash! Pack Claim on the Product states that with every wash, the consumer would get “one tone fairer skin” Pack Claim on the Product states that upon the usage of the Product, “Dark Spots are reduced” "

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"It is clear from the scheme of the above claims that the claim being made in the TVC is with respect to “fairness” and not merely a fairer look. Therefore, the product should be able to deliver physiological change in the skin and deliver fairness. To therefore 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 instant whitening / fairness. Such benefit needs to be demonstrated through clinical evidence, as the claim is not about the benefit of a fair look, but fairer skin itself. In the absence of specific clinical data in this regard, the claim is untenable. It is extremely important to note that the Pack Claim on the Product states that with every wash, the consumer would get “one tone fairer skin”. It implies that (a) the Product can actually provide fairness, and (b) with every wash of the Product, the consumer would keep getting 1 tone fairer skin, continuously. With a wash-off product format, to substantiate such a claim, the Advertiser would have to show, through clinical evidence, that the Product delivers one tone fairer skin, and that it keep getting one tone fairer with every wash. The advertiser also claims that the Product fights spots. It needs to be considered that this Product is a wash-off product, and in application, has very limited contact time with the skin. In such brief contact time, it is highly improbable that the Product would deliver on the benefit of spot reduction. To make such a tall claim with respect to the Product, it needs to be shown through clinical evidence that the product, in spite of its short contact time with the skin due to the nature of the application, reduces spots. It is also important to note that the Pack Claim on the Product states that upon the usage of the Product, “Dark Spots are reduced”. It is therefore imperative for the Advertiser to show, through clinical evidence, that the Product reduces spots, in spite of being a wash-off product. In the absence of such data, the claim is untenable "

RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD

"The advertiser representatives were given personal hearing by ASCI with the technical expert. Advertiser confirmed that they wish to seek a review of claims taken up in the earlier decision except for the claim – “helps reduce dark spots”. The claim support data was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC viewed the product packaging and the TVC, and considered the Advertiser’s response for Review as well as opinion of the Technical expert presented at the meeting. The CCC noted that the specific claim related to one tone fairer effect, this perception of “one tone” was based on shade cards that were used in the consumer perception study as submitted in the first response to the complaint. Advertiser was asked to provide clinical evidence to show that the “whitening” is physiological and not just by virtue of removal dirt by cleansing. The additional data now describes machine based measurements of skin tone and brightness using a chromameter. The study indicates increase in skin luminance. However how this translates into “number of shades / tones” was not provided in the support data. The CCC concluded that Pack claims, “instant whitening”, “Gives 1 tone fairer looking skin in one wash” were not substantiated. The TVC claim, “You think only cream can give you visible fairness? Think again …. This fights dark spots and gives instant whitening”, was misleading by implication. The product packaging and the TVC contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The decision of complaint being Upheld stands on Review."

 
 

 

Complaint to
WhatsApp
DID YOU KNOW?

Developed by Wishtree Technologies LLP