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

Select Month :

 
ASCI Recommendations
 

COMPANY:"New Delhi Institute of Management"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“Presidents of FICCI and PHDCCI on the Board”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"It is surprising that some educational institutions have been blatantly advertising regarding placement to allure students. I enclose an advertisement released in the Telegraph recently by New Delhi Institute of Management. It claims ""100 finest placements"" in its advertisement. It also drops very important names and claims that Presidents of FICCI and PHDCCI are on its Board. But that does not prevent it to adopt unethical means to attract prospective students. I hope you will deal with the matter appropriately."

Recommendation: NOT UPHELD

"The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the Complainant. However, in the absence of response prior to the due date, the matter was examined by the CCC on the basis of the materials available then and an exparte decision was taken. On receiving the CCC’s recommendation, and request for confirmation of compliance, the advertiser responded with additional data for the claim, “Presidents of FICCI and PHDCCI on the Board”. As claim support data, the advertiser provided the first page of the Minutes of the Board meetings and the photographs of the meetings showing the attendance of the Presidents of FICCI and PHDCCI on the Board. Also, the advertiser provided their confirmation letters accepting to be Directors on NDIM Board. The CCC reviewed this data, and concluded that this claim was substantiated. This complaint is Not Upheld on Review."

COMPANY:"Thosh "
PRODUCT:"Thosh Ion Shower"

COMPLAINT:

"“Good news for those who are suffering from Asthma, Respiratory diseases & Breathing problems, Allergy, Migraine Insomnia And those who are fed up of taking heavy medication and pills for the same. Now Negative Ion therapy has a solution. “Thosh Ion Shower” available at just Rs. 2100/- Pls call”"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"This company is marketing a medical product which claims to prevent and cure all sorts of diseases without an iota of evidence. I request you to kindly take action on this and restrain this advertiser from making these claims without any evidence. With reference to the above, the complaint is baout the false and misleading ad of an enterprise called Thosh whose full name is Thosh Ion Shower 124, Trishul Bldg No 2, Opposite Railway Station, Lower Parel West Mumbai 400013 This ad is taken from their face book page which goes in the name of Health Care administrators (Thosh). You could check their site on face book where this ad. has been given. This is the which has been taken as a cut and paste job from their face book page. My objections to it are: 1. It makes claims without any evidence. 2. It makes claims of curing and preventing disease. The ad still exists in their face book page of Thosh. So, there is no question of needing any time or date for it. for the record you can take it as 30th of July, 2016 at 11 a.m."

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the Complainant. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the website and the facebook advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser states that their product does not cure or guarantee to cure Asthma, Respiratory diseases, Allergy, Migraine, Insomnia and blood pressure and the device generates negative ions which is primarily used in purifying air. Advertiser relied on internet search based support data on the efficacy of negative ions. The CCC noted that the Advertiser did not provide any authentic data to prove performance of their product and any scientific studies to estimate the emission of negative ions from the device. Also no clinical evidence was presented specific to the advertised product. In the absence of such claim support data, the CCC concluded that the claims, “Good news for those who are suffering from Asthma, Respiratory diseases & Breathing problems, Allergy, Migraine Insomnia, And those who are fed up of taking heavy medication and pills for the same. Now Negative Ion therapy has a solution”, were not substantiated and are misleading by gross exaggeration. The website and facebook advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The CCC recommendation that the complaint being Upheld stands on Review."

COMPANY:"Respi Care"
PRODUCT:"Salt Room Therapy"

COMPLAINT:

“100% Natural Therapy for Breathing & Skin Problems” - “Asthma - Brochitis – Rheumatoid Arthritis – Sinusitis – Wheezing – Eczema – Psoriasis – ILD – COPD – Anxiety – Sarcoidosis - Stress – Pulmonary Fibrosis – Respiratory Allergy – Smokers Cough – Frequent Cold Cough – Atopic Dermatitis”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"With reference to the above, I am attaching a photo of the false and misleading advertisement of a treatment called as salt room therapy which is supposed to cure a number of skin and respiratory ailments as shown in the ad. It is supposed to be run by a Dr. Loknath who claims to be 'educated' in a number of hospitals but has only one recognised degree that is MBBS. His biodata on the site of www.respicare.com is as below: DR. K.P. LOKNATH KUMAR MEDICAL DIRECTOR Well-established entrepreneur and a Healthcare Provider for over three decades now with a sound clientele, A ByWord in non-invasive treatments. Dr Loknath's list of accomplishments are endless. Dr. Loknath Kumar has been practicing for over 35 yrs. as Physician and his other experiences include 20 yrs. in C.T. Scan & MRI, 10 yrs. in Bone Densitometry, 6 yrs. in HMO activity, 10 yrs. in Laser Epilation and Vascular Treatment and allied Laser application fields such as Low Level Laser Therapy & MIRE Therapy, and 6 years in QMRT® technology, 2 years in Drugless Allergy Treatments. 1. First doctor to establish the Biggest Diagnostic Centre in South Bangalore in Radiology, Cardiology, Full Fledged Laboratory including Pathology, Biochemistry, Microbiology, Pulmonology, Gastroenterology, Paediatrics, Gynecology, Endocrinology, Orthopedics in 1991. 2. First doctor to establish a Sytec 2000 I CT Scan centre in the country in 1995.3. First doctor to establish a Bone Densitometry Centre for assessing Bone Mass Density and treating Osteoporosis in the country in 1996. 4. First doctor to establish a noninvasive Laser Clinic focused on offering solutions to Hair treatments, Vascular Treatments and allied laser applications centre in the country in 2000. 5. First doctor to establish Anodyne India Centre for Reversing Symptoms of Diabetic Peripheral Neuropathy in the country in 2003. 6. First doctor to establish Care Plus - a noninvasive arthritis treatment center in South Bangalore in 2008. 7. First doctor to establish Respi Care , A drugless Allergy Treatment Centre focused on offering drugless therapy for Respiratory and Skin Allergies in Karnataka in 2013. Dr. Loknath Kumar is a member of IMA & various medical organizations, interacting with various consultants in all specializations in all disciplines. He is a regular speaker at leading healthcare conferences and several T.V. shows. Medical Education (MBBS), KMC, Hubli, India. Internship at Victoria,Vanivilas, Nimhans, Minto, Kidwai, Bowring, Jayadeva Institute of Cardiology Hospitals.The claims are not supported by any medical evidence but only by his statements. Again, registered medical practitioners under the evidence based system of medicine are specifially barred from advertising any goods or services which he has been doing. This advertisement should be banned as it misleads people suffering from these chronic diseases that they can be cured by this unproven therapy. There are chances that they could even stop regular treatment and go for this. I also request you to kindly go to the site mentioned in the ad www.respicare.com to see more about this false and misleading advertisment not based on any evidence. The only so called evidence that can be seen are the so called testimonials of some alleged patients."

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 salt room therapy is a 100% natural therapy which helps in reducing the medications and symptoms for a longer period and helps for a better quality of life in many respiratory patients; RespiCare is practicing the Salt Therapy as a complimentary therapy and are not prescribing any medication for the ailments claimed. As claim support data, the advertiser provided abstracts of Select Publications. The claim support data was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response as well as opinion of the Technical expert presented at the meeting. The CCC noted that while the advertiser argues that the Salt Room Therapy is a complementary treatment, the advertisement is silent on this aspect. In fact, the ad claims “the drugless allergy therapy centre”. The CCC concluded that the advertisement with claims, “100% Natural Therapy for Breathing & Skin Problems” - “Asthma - Brochitis – Rheumatoid Arthritis – Sinusitis – Wheezing – Eczema – Psoriasis – ILD – COPD – Anxiety – Sarcoidosis - Stress – Pulmonary Fibrosis – Respiratory Allergy – Smokers Cough – Frequent Cold Cough – Atopic Dermatitis”, is ambiguous and is misleading by implication and exaggeration as it suggests cure for various ailments claimed in the advertisement including Rheumatoid Arthritis and Sarcoidosis. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Vodafone India Ltd "
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“Presenting Vodafone SuperNet, our best ever network”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"On the Vodafone ad about supernet, they claim to be best network on YouTube. The link for the yout tube is follows: HTTPS://YouTu.be/vFENpKmiuhY Vodafone claims to be the best network. They don't provide connectivity everywhere and yet claim to be best. Is this not misleading the customers into believing them to be best and better than others. They have connectivity problems in Delhi and I get no signal at placed in and near my residence."

Recommendation: NOT UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. Advertiser states that the claim is not competitive in nature and doesn't compare with other networks. It only means that Vodafone is providing better network now than it has provided in the past. As claim support data, the advertiser provided reports which highlight how their services have improved over the past. 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. Based on the data submitted by the advertiser, the CCC noted that Vodafone has upgraded their network. The CCC concluded that the claim, “Vodafone SuperNet our best ever network”, was substantiated. The complaint was NOT UPHELD."

COMPANY:"Rohit Surfactant Pvt. Ltd"
PRODUCT:"Ghadi Detergent Bar"

COMPLAINT:

"In the Print Advertisement, the Advertiser claims “Pesh Hain Cuff aur Collar Specialist. Ab Jaisa bhi Mel Ho, Uska Puri Tarah Se Safya” (Translation: Presenting Cuff and Collar Specialist. Now be any kind of dirt, it gets completely cleaned) In the TVC, it is claimed “Layiye Ghadi detergent cake jo hain Cuff aur Collar ka Specialist. Is se Cuff aur Collar ho saaf puri tarah” (Translation: Get Ghadi detergent cake which is a cuff and collar specialist. It completely cleans cuff and collar” ”"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"When the Advertisements are perused, it is clear that the Advertiser in both print and TVC is claiming the Product to remove any and all kind of dirt/stain from the cuff and collar of shirts completely i.e. 100% cleaning efficacy. We have conducted a cleaning efficacy performance test of the Product on cuff and collars of shirts in a globally recognized independent laboratory. We have herein attached as Annexure B the results of the independent laboratory test for your reference. The results confirm that the Product cannot completely remove/clean dirt or stain from cuffs and collars of shirts as claimed by the Advertiser. It is pertinent to note that the above test have been performed in the most consumer relevant conditions. The Advertisements depict and claim the Product alone to have the capability to remove dirt from cuffs and collars. The test however have used the Product along with Brush as used in a consumer household. Further the test have been conducted under two conditions: 1) One Stroke of detergent and one stroke of Brush and 2) Three strokes of detergent and three strokes of Brush. Consumer used shirts were procured for tests to replicate a real life body stain occurrence on collars and as also depicted in the Advertisements. Other consumer relevant protocols such as replications of the tests, fabric types, rinses etc. were followed and have been captured in the report for your perusal. The Advertiser’s Product under both conditions failed to completely clean even the body dirt/stain on the collars of the shirts, hence any and all the claims of completely cleaning cuff and collars made by the Advertiser in reference to his Product is false, misleading and unsubstantiated."

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The advertiser was granted an extension of three days to the standard lead time to submit their reply in response to their request for extension of six days. 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 states that claim, “puri tarha” means “thoroughly” and does not imply “100% cleaning efficiency”. The Advertiser also challenges the test protocol used in the lab tests submitted by the complainant as there is no proven or time-tested methodology that has been used in the said tests. Advertiser refers to consumer research study conducted by their in-house team to support the claim on the efficacy of Ghadi detergent cake. The claim support data was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC viewed the print advertisement, the TVC and considered the Advertiser’s response as well as opinion of the Technical expert presented at the meeting. The CCC noted that while the advertiser dismisses the independent test data submitted by the complainant doubting its validity, the advertiser did not submit any independent product efficacy data. As per the data based on the in house test by the advertiser, only 66% respondents reported that the product cleans ‘completely’ and the rest stated the efficacy to be average. The CCC concluded that the print advertisement claim, “Ab Jaisa bhi Mel Ho, Uska Puri Tarah Se Safya” (“Now be any kind of dirt, it gets completely cleaned”), and the TVC claim, “Is se Cuff aur Collar ho saaf puri tarah” (“It completely cleans cuff and collar”), were not substantiated with an independent third party study, and are misleading by exaggeration. The print advertisement and the TVC contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Sanjeevani Herbals "
PRODUCT:"Ayurveda Mix Plus Kashaya Soap"

COMPLAINT:

"Advt. appeared in Malayalam bi-weekly magazine Gruhalakshmi dated 16-31 August 2016 page no. 75. It claims that the soap contain 80-88% TFM. The TFM of the soap is only 65%. It is a false claim. The soap is an oil based handmade soap, it cannot have more than 70% TFM. The Ayurveda mix Kashaya Soap is a oil based handmade soap. Which means they are making the soap directly from Oils by saphonifying the oils with Sodium Hydroxide. In this method of manufacturing, the Sodium Hydroxide diluted in water and used for manufacturing. The average moisture content of such soap is around 20%. Apart from this, about 6 to 7% Glycerine which is a by-product also will be there in such soaps. Since the fatty matter content of Oils are around 90%, it is next to impossible to have 80 or 88% TFM (Total Fatty Matter) in these kind of soap unless the moisture content is reduced to around 10% and the Glycerine is taken out which is not the case in this soap. Popular soaps in India made in the above method are Chandrika and Medimix. Both soaps TFM are below 64%. I did get analyse the Ayurveda mix Kashaya Soap some time back and found that it contain more than 20% moisture and the TFM was only 63%."

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 responded that they have test reports and scientific findings to support their claim and requested two additional weeks to respond. The advertiser was granted an extension of three days to the standard lead time to submit their reply; However, the advertiser did not submit any data to substantiate the same. In the absence of claim support data, the CCC concluded that the claim (in Malayalam) as translated in English, “Ayurvedamix Plus Kashaya Soap is the only soap in the market with 80-88% TFM”, was not substantiated with analytical report for TFM measurement and comparative data versus other similar soaps in the same category, and is misleading. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Anytime Fitness "
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“Saw this ad today. It was inserted as a full page flier in the TOI Bandra area. Claims to be world’s largest Gym chain.”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: NOT UPHELD

"The advertiser representatives were given personal hearing by ASCI. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. As claim support data, the advertiser provided The International Health Racquet and Sportsclub Association (IHRSA) report which indicated the advertised Gym has the highest number of franchises worldwide. The CCC concluded that the claim, “World’s Largest Gym Chain”, was substantiated. The complaint was NOT UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Fena Limited "
PRODUCT:"Impact Smart Wash Detergent"

COMPLAINT:

"We wish to express our strong discontent, against the illicit use of our product shot to gain brand superiority by projecting our brand as ineffective. The “Ujala” bottle is clearly visible in the aforementioned TVC, from the time length starting at 00:22 secs till 00:25 secs during the product window section of ‘Impact’ TVC. Our product “Ujala” is placed at extreme left in the frame, along with other adjoining products. We object the wrong claim, made by the manufacturer of Impact that this detergent (Impact) gives better whitening than the group of competitive products shown in the TVC; and ‘Ujala’ being one of them. As a matter of fact, ‘Ujala’ is a specially formulated fabric-whitener that contains up to 90% whitening agents (named Ultra Radiance molecules) while the detergents usually do not contain more than 10% whitening agents. As mentioned the bottle shown in the TVC as a Fabric whitener is shaped as the Ujala bottle and is in Ujala brand blue colour with the white cap. In light of the above, it is understood that the motive of the advertiser is to use our product image, to enhance own brand value by making a false claim, which we feel is totally unethical. We request that the advertiser be asked to withdraw our product pack or alter the shape of the bottle or withdraw the TVC itself with immediate effect."

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: NOT UPHELD

"The advertiser was granted an extension of four days to the standard lead time of seven days to submit their reply in response to their request for extension. 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 states that the TVC is promoting their product as a complete washing solution, whereas the Complainant's product “Ujala” is merely claimed to be a fabric whitener meant for post wash use. Also, the bottle displayed in the TVC is not Ujala bottle, as there are hundreds of fabric brighteners in the market and most of them have blue bottle with white cap and are similarly shaped as each other. As claim support data, the advertiser provided images of 17 fabric brighteners bottles currently available in the market. 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 CCC noted that, complainant’s product Ujala is a fabric whitener whereas the advertised product Impact is a washing powder / detergent. Also, the TVC says "safai kare …" (i.e. cleans) not "safed kare ..." (“whitens”). The blue bottle and shape shown in the TVC is indeed used by many others in this product category so this bottle shape and colour is not so unique as to imply Ujala. Based on this assessment, the CCC concluded that the blue bottle neither implies nor does the TVC disparage Ujala. The complaint was NOT UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Enterr 10 Televisions Pvt. Ltd"
PRODUCT:"Bhojpuri Cinema"

COMPLAINT:

“No.1 Bhojpuri Channel, 4 Weeks In A Row ”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The CCC noted that the advertiser was offered Informal Resolution of the complaint however, they did not complete the formalities prior to the due date for the same. Therefore, the complaint was processed for CCC deliberations. The advertiser submitted their written response. Advertiser states that the data used in the mailer has been analysed and implemented purely post mapping all the BARC points and there has been an unintentional language issue in the claim. The statement was supposed to be, “No. 1 BHOJPURI CHANNEL OVER FOUR WEEK’S AVERAGE” The CCC viewed the advertisement – mailer, referred the advertiser’s response and concluded that the claim, “No.1 Bhojpuri Channel, 4 Weeks In A Row”, is false, was not substantiated. The advertisement - mailer contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY:"Think & Learn Pvt Ltd "
PRODUCT:"BYJUs Classes"

COMPLAINT:

“70% of our GMAT students in last 8 years have crossed 700”

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 for this complaint. The CCC viewed the website advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “70% of our GMAT students in last 8 years have crossed 700”, was not substantiated with authentic supporting data nor any independent audit or verification certificate, and the claim is misleading by exaggeration. The website 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:"Cheil India P. Ltd "
PRODUCT:"Samsung Galaxy S5"

COMPLAINT:

“http://www.samsung.com/in/galaxys5/ above link is of samsung India website the advertisement says "buy galaxy s5 and get free 4G data for 6 months" this one is misguiding and hiding many things without citing any Terms and condition on the page. After checking this advertisement over Samsung India website I bought the product from flipkart WS retailer (that too after taking confirmation from samsung call center whether i should buy from flipkart or not), next i contacted Airtel to avail the offer benefit then Airtel guy told me that the handset Galaxy S5 does not have 4G support. then i realized that I have been cheated by samsung. I spend my hard earned money by looking over the misleading advertisement and did not get the feature and benefit which was shown. I wrote to Samsung, but till date i got nothing but an assurance for resolution. now not getting any reply from them.”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the website advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser states that the offer was available on 3G and 4G variants of Galaxy S5. Since the customer has purchased the 3G variant he is eligible for the 3G data for 6 months but not eligible for the 4G data offer. The CCC noted that a consumer who opts to buy a lower priced phone, could be misled as the advertisement does not provide this information. The CCC concluded that the claim offer "Get free 4G data for 6 months”, is misleading by ambiguity and omission of mention that the conditions. The website advertisement contravened Chapter I.4 of the Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Gate Institute of Technology & Management "
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“100% Job Guarantee”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “100% Job Guarantee”, was not substantiated with authentic supporting data such as detailed list of students who have been placed through their Institute, contact details of students for verification, enrolment forms and appointment letters received by the students. 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:"Bhadauria Group of Institutions "
PRODUCT:"Jaswant Sinh Bhadauria Institute of Technology & Baba Saheb Ambedkar Polytechnic"

COMPLAINT:

“100% Assured Placement”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “100% Assured Placement”, was not substantiated with authentic supporting data such as detailed list of students who have been placed through their Institute, contact details of students for verification, enrolment forms and appointment letters received by the students, nor any independent audit or verification certificate. Also, the claim is misleading by 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:"Dr. Virendra Swarup Group of Institutions "
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“100% Assured Placement”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “100% Assured Placement”, was not substantiated with authentic supporting data such as detailed list of students who have been placed through their Institute, contact details of students for verification, enrolment forms and appointment letters received by the students, nor any independent audit or verification certificate. Also, the claim is misleading by 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:"Radhe Sumiran Women’s Hospital "
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"1. Top-3 Best Test Tube Baby (IVF) Centre by Times of India Health Survey. 2. Best in IVF "

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 Times of India in their Health issue have declared them to be the best centre, and the claim of they being the Best in IVF is based on their patients review results. The CCC noted that the Advertiser did not provide details of The Times of India Health Survey and there was no support data to prove the hospital being the “best” . The CCC concluded that the claims in Gujarathi (as translated in English), “Top-3 Best Test Tube Baby (IVF) Centre by Times of India Health Survey”, and “Best in IVF”, were not substantiated with supporting proof, and are misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY:"CAC CA Campus "
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“No.1 in Kerala in Results”

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 in the last 9 years their students have come out as center topper in CPT eight times and hence they are the only center in Kerala to produce such results consistently for all levels of CA. However, the CCC noted that the Advertiser did not provide any supporting data for the claim made. The CCC concluded that the claim, “No.1 in Kerala in Results”, was not substantiated with comparative data versus other similar institutes in the same category or any third party validation or research to prove this claim. 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:"Desh Bhagat University "
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“100% Placement Assurance”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “100% Placement Assurance”, 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:"Uttam Group of Institutions "
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“Best Management Institute in North India For Placement - Awarded By Brand Impact”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “Best Management Institute in North India For Placement - Awarded By Brand Impact”, was not substantiated with the Brand Impact survey results as quoted and an rationale for their selection and is misleading by omission of the mention of the year in which this award was granted. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1, I.2 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Capitol Hospital "
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“Successful treatment of cancer through Brachytherapy”

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. As claim support data, the Advertiser provided Guidelines - Carcinoma_Cervix_Part II and Guidelines - High Dose-Rate. Advertiser states that Brachytherapy is a form of radiotherapy which is successful because of its far-reaching effectiveness in treatment of cancer. The claim support data was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response as well as opinion of the Technical expert presented at the meeting. The CCC noted that Brachytherapy is a known modality but to claim ""Nischit"" and “safal” treatment meaning guaranteed cure is misleading. Also, the CCC concluded that the claim (in Hindi) as translated in English, “Successful treatment of cancer through Brachytherapy”, is in Breach of the law as it violated The Drugs & Magic Remedies Act. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.4 and III.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY: "Image Herbals "
PRODUCT:"Till Night Capsule"

COMPLAINT:

"1. Best Ayurvedic Medicine for Happy Married Relationship 2. Till Night Capsule (Product Name) "

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “Best Ayurvedic Medicine for Happy Married Relationship”, was not substantiated with product efficacy data, and is misleading. Also, this claim 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: "Lakshya Group of Colleges "
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"1. 100% Result 2. 100 % Scholarship "

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objections raised in the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the print advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims, “100% Result”, and “100% Scholarship”, were not substantiated with any verifiable support data, and are misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY:"Millennium Group Of Institutions "
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"1. Leader in campus Placement 2. Awarded for best Technical Education "

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objections raised in the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the print advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “Leader in campus Placement”, was not substantiated with comparative data versus other similar institutes in the same category or any third party validation or research to prove this claim. Also, the claim is misleading by ambiguity and omission of the reference to the particular criteria for which they are the leader. The claim, “Awarded for best Technical Education”, was not substantiated with details, references of the award received such as the year, source and category. The claim is misleading by omission of a disclaimer to qualify the claim. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1, I.2 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Ganpat University U.V Patel College of Engineering "
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"1. “100% Internship with stipend” 2. “100% Placement in last 3 years.” "

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. Advertiser was further requested to provide exhaustive data for the claims made, for which they were granted an extension of five days. As claim support data, the Advertiser provided an MOU between the institute and eITRA. Advertiser states that in the last three batches of 2012-14, 2013-15 and 2014-16, they have achieved 100% placements, and also have managed to provide 100 % internship to the students in elnfochips as well as other companies. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. The CCC noted that the batch sizes being referred to by the institute are 27, 32 and 23. While the advertiser has referred to the MOU, it indicates only “Placemnet support”. Also, there is a reference to internship in the second year but does not have the mention of stipend. The advertiser did not provide authentic supporting data (such as detailed list of students who have been placed through their Institute, contact details of students for verification, enrolment forms and appointment letters received by the students from the companies referred to in the advertisement). The CCC concluded that the claims, “100% Internship with stipend” and “100% Placement in last 3 years”, were not substantiated and are misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement also 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:"Vision Group of Institutions "
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"“100% placement of PGDM Batch for 2nd consecutive year” "

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the print advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “100% placement of PGDM Batch for 2nd consecutive year”, was not substantiated with authentic supporting data such as detailed list of students who have been placed through their Institute, batch wise details, contact details of students for verification, enrolment forms and appointment letters received by the students, nor any independent audit or verification certificate. Also, the claim is misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement also contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY: "MIET Computer Education"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“From just 45 days Training Get 100% Job”, “100% Discount to 100% people on Every Course”

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 has only made assertions regarding the job guarantee but did not provide any authentic supporting data for the claims made. The CCC concluded that the claim, “From just 45 days Training Get 100% Job”, was not substantiated with data such as detailed list of students who have been placed through their Institute, contact details of students for verification, enrolment forms and appointment letters received by the students nor any independent audit or verification certificate. Also, the claim is misleading by exaggeration. The claim, “100% Discount to 100% people on Every Course”, was not substantiated with supporting proof, and is misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement also 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: "Green Fields Institute of Agriculture"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“100% Placement Assistance”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the advertisement and concluded that the use of “100%” numerical claim is not relevant for “placement assistance” claim. The claim is misleading by implication. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapter I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

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

COMPLAINT:

"1. The most trusted and reputed institute among the Medical Aspirants of Bihar, Jharkhand & West Bengal 2. Nation’s Leading Institute 3. India’s No.1 Institute in terms of Result Ratio 4. Provide your child the best education system under the best leadership 5. Trust over 8000+ Medicos & Doctors who have successfully qualified in Top Medical Colleges of India & Abroad"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. The CCC observed that the Advertiser has only made assertions regarding their claims but did not provide any authentic supporting data for the claims made. The CCC concluded that the claims, “The most trusted and reputed institute among the Medical Aspirants of Bihar, Jharkhand & West Bengal”, “Nation’s Leading Institute”, “India’s No.1 Institute in terms of Result Ratio”, were not substantiated with any verifiable comparative data versus other similar institutes in the same category or any third party validation or research to prove these claims. Also, the claims are misleading by exaggeration. The claims, “Provide your child the best education system under the best leadership”, and “Trust over 8000+ Medicos & Doctors who have successfully qualified in Top Medical Colleges of India & Abroad”, were not substantiated with any authentic data, and are misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement also contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"S R Group of Institution"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“100% Student Placed”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “100% Student Placed”, was not substantiated with authentic supporting data such as detailed list of students who have been placed through their Institute, contact details of students for verification, enrolment forms and appointment letters received by the students, nor any independent audit or verification certificate. Also, the claim is misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement also 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:"Br. Nath Pai Shikshan Sanstha Sindhudurg."
PRODUCT:"Br. Nath Pai Nursing Education & Research Academy"

COMPLAINT:

“100% Job Placement Guarantee”

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 the claim is based on their placement cell performance for the last three years. All successful candidates were successfully placed in the hospital of repute all over Maharashtra, Pune and Mumbai. As claim support data, the advertiser provided a copy of MoU signed between the institute and Apple Saraswati multi- specialty hospital, Kolhapur, for guaranteed recruitment of their best candidates. The CCC noted that the MOU provides for internship for all students and does not guarantee job. The CCC concluded that the claim, “100% Job Placement Guarantee”, was not substantiated with authentic supporting data such as detailed list of students who have been placed through their Institute, contact details of students for verification, enrolment forms and appointment letters received by the students. Also, the claim is misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement also contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Amity University "
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“100% Placement”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser asserts that the claim is factually correct as 100% placement has been achieved for the eligible 2016 batch of Greater Noida campus. Advertiser did not provide any supporting data for the claim made. The CCC concluded that the claim, “100% Placement”, was not substantiated with authentic data such as detailed list of students who have been placed through their Institute, contact details of students for verification, enrolment forms and appointment letters received by the students, nor any independent audit or verification certificate. Also, the claim is misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement also 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:"MV Media Institute "
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“100% Placement record”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in the complaint. 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 for this complaint. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “100% Placement record”, was not substantiated with authentic supporting data such as detailed list of students who have been placed through their Institute, contact details of students for verification, enrolment forms and appointment letters received by the students, nor any independent audit or verification certificate, and is misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement also 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:"Gandhi Engineering College"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“Assured Campus Placement”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “Assured Campus Placement”, was not substantiated with verifiable support data, and is misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement also 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:"Shivalik Polytechnic"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“Fully Job Assurance”

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 did not provide any supporting data for the claim made. The CCC concluded that the claim, “Fully Job Assurance”, was not substantiated with verifiable support data, and is misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement also 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: "Eshan College of Engineering"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“100% Placement Record”, “Highest results in U.P. Among All Private Polytechnic Institutions”

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 the claim “100% Placement Record”, was a printing mistake. The advertiser did not provide any supporting data for the claim “Highest results in U.P. Among All Private Polytechnic Institutions”. Also, the claims are misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"International Institution of Technology & Professional Training (IITPT)"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“100% Placement, Job Guaranteed if not then get your Course Fees back”

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 nor did they avail the opportunity of a telecom and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. The advertiser states that he has only 8 to 12 students doing the crash course and he did not provide any supporting data for the claims made. The CCC concluded that the claim, “100% Placement, Job Guaranteed, if not then get your Course Fees back”, was not substantiated with authentic supporting data such as detailed list of students who have been placed through their Institute, contact details of students for verification, enrolment forms and appointment letters received by the students. Also, the advertiser did not provide evidence to prove that course fees have been refunded to those who have not been provided with jobs. The claims are misleading by gross exaggeration. The advertisement also 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:"British School of Languages"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“No.1 from 2000 to 2016”

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 did not provide any supporting data for the claim made. In the absence of claim support data, the CCC concluded that the claim, “No.1 from 2000 to 2016”, was not substantiated with comparative data versus other similar institutes in the same category or any third party validation or research to prove this claim, 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: "Rise Study Circle "
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“100% Job Guarantee Course”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the concerned Media (Sakshi Telugu News Daily) for their assistance in providing the contact details of the advertiser, or to forward the complaint to the advertiser. The CCC noted that no response was received from the advertiser or from the concerned media prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the print advertisement. In the absence of response from the concerned media and comments from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “100% Job Guarantee Course”, was not substantiated with supporting data, and is also misleading by ambiguity. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "HP College of Education"
PRODUCT:"(HP Institute of Management Studies) (HPIMS)"

COMPLAINT:

“100% Job Placement”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser did not provide any supporting data for the claim made. In the absence of claim support data, the CCC concluded that the claim, “100% Job Placement”, was not substantiated with authentic supporting data such as detailed list of students who have been placed through their Institute, contact details of students for verification, enrolment forms and appointment letters received by the students, nor any independent audit or verification certificate. Also, the claim is misleading by exaggeration. The 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: "MFB Herbal Dawakhana"
PRODUCT:"Alshifa Churna"

COMPLAINT:

"1. Reduce Weight 2. It reduces 2 to 4 inch of your Belly fat in 2 months 3. Alshifa Churna reduces the excess fat on your body, arthritis and joints pain and your increased belly fat and makes your body and personality beautiful without any gym."

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objections raised in the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. 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 Weight”, “reduces 2 to 4 inch of your Belly fat in 2 months”, “Alshifa Churna reduces the excess fat on your body, arthritis and joints pain and your increased belly fat and makes your body and personality beautiful without any gym”, were not substantiated with proof of efficacy, and efficacy being depicted via images of before and after the treatment in the advertisement and on the pack are misleading. With reference to the claim “motapa ghataye” and the accompanying visual, the advertisement is misleading by implication that the product would solve the problem of obesity and therefore is in Breach of the law as it violated The Drugs & Magic Remedies Act (item 38 under DMR schedule). The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1, I.4 and III.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Andslite Pvt. Ltd "
PRODUCT:"Andslite Lighting Products"

COMPLAINT:

“India's No.1 LED Products”

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 argues that they are the only and the first one to manufacture and sell the LED Lighting products in India, so their products automatically become the No.1 LED products of India. Advertiser did not provide any supporting data for the claim made. Based on the advertiser arguments, CCC observed that the advertiser means to communicate they are the first to enter the market. However, this does not make them No.1 which means leadership over other brands. The CCC concluded that the claim, “India's No.1 LED Products”, was not substantiated with comparative data versus other similar products in the same category or any third party validation or research to prove this claim. Also, the claim is misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Surya Pharmaceuticals"
PRODUCT:"Nephromed Tablets & Syrup"

COMPLAINT:

"1. Avoid Dialysis & Kidney Transplant Page 30 of 44 2. Claims of healing accepted by the Govt"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The advertiser representatives were given personal hearing by ASCI. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. As claim support data, the advertiser submitted letters from Central Council for Research in Ayurvedic Sciences (CCRAS) in the context of the Research thesis acceptance, product licence copy, and letter to CCRAS for clinical standardization. However, the CCC noted that this data was conclusive regarding the product efficacy or the “Claims of healing approved accepted by Government”. The CCC concluded that the claim, “Avoid Dialysis & Kidney Transplant”, was not substantiated with evidence of product efficacy and any clinical data specific to the product being advertised and was misleading by exaggeration. The claim of “Claims of healing accepted by the Govt”, was not misleading by ambiguity and implication. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Advance Homeopathy Research Centre"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“Certificate from Golden Book of World Records for taking out 11*66mm stones without operation”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in the complaint. The Advertiser responded requesting for a personal hearing with ASCI, but did not attend on the date and time offered to them. Advertiser submitted their formal response. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser states that the claim is made on the basis of the certificate of excellence issued to them by the Golden Book of world Records. As claim support data, the advertiser provided a copy of this certificate. The certificate stated that “As per medical report of August 2013 Dr. Dwivedi, a homeopathy practitioner successfully removed 11x6 mm calculus through urinary tract without a surgery”. The CCC did not consider this to be adequate substantiation as the quoted medical report was not furnished as well as there was no basis of this being “world record” as it appeared only a “self-declaration” by people who chose to register with the web-site Golden Book of World Records. The data was not considered to be credible and an authentic source for making such medical claims. The CCC concluded that the claim (in Hindi) as translated in English, “Certificate from Golden Book of World Records for taking out 11*66mm stones without operation”, was not substantiated with authentic data, and is misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Rediscover Clinic "
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"1. Get rid of unwanted bulges 2. Spot reduction -Lose upto 5-8 cms from one area (Non- Surgical) 3. 7 Days Fast Track Programme Body Sculpting & Shaping-Lose unto 35-50 cm from Abdomen, Hips, Thighs etc and upto 5 kgs. through Anticellulite treatment"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objections raised in the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims, “Get rid of unwanted bulges”, “Spot reduction - Lose upto 5-8 cms from one area (Non- Surgical)”, “7 Days Fast Track Programme Body Sculpting & Shaping-Lose unto 35-50 cm from Abdomen, Hips, Thighs etc and upto 5 kgs. through Anticellulite treatment”, were not substantiated with clinical proof of treatment efficacy, and are misleading. Also, efficacy being depicted via images of before and after the treatment in the advertisement is grossly misleading. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"34 Heart Care "
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"Freedom from heart diseases, Treatment without operation"

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. Advertiser states that they provide treatment via External Counter Pulsation (ECP) and Chelation Therapy and briefly explained the benefits of these in case of Coronary Artery Disease (CAD) patients. The advertiser’s response was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response as well as opinion of the Technical expert presented at the meeting. The CCC noted that while the advertiser refers to CAD and their response refers to some select indications, the print advertisement makes a sweeping claim that the treatment gives freedom from heart diseases and gives a visual impression that the treatment cleans the coronary arteries of fat deposits (cholesterol). Also, the indications mentioned in the advertiser’s response has not been clarified in the advertisement. The CCC concluded that the claims (in Hindi) as translated in English, “Freedom from heart diseases, Treatment without operation”, and the visuals in the print advertisement were misleading by ambiguity and implication. Also, specific to the claims related to treatment of heart disease, the advertisement is in Breach of the law as it violated The Drugs & Magic Remedies Act. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.4 and III.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"The Body Care & Cure"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“Reduce upto 5 KG in just 12 Hours”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “Reduce upto 5 KG in just 12 Hours”, was not substantiated with supporting clinical evidence, and is misleading by gross exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Achme A Health Ashram"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“Lose Upto 8-10 Cms in one sitting from one area without any efforts”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “Lose Upto 8-10 Cms in one sitting from one area without any efforts”, was not substantiated with supporting clinical evidence, and is misleading by gross exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

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

COMPLAINT:

"1. Medically Proven 2. Trust Of More Than 50 Lakh People 3. President Award Winner 4. Product Name – Myfair Forever 5. Pack Visual Showing the transformation of the models face from dark to fair is misleading"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objections raised in the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “Medically Proven”, was not substantiated with clinical evidence, and is misleading. Claim, “Trust of More Than 50 Lakh People”, was not proven with supporting data and is misleading by exaggeration. Claim, “President Award Winner”, was not substantiated with details of the award as well as references of the award such as the year, source and category for the award received. The advertisement is misleading by omission of a disclaimer to qualify the claim. Pack Visual showing the transformation of the model’s face from dark to fair is misleading by gross exaggeration. . The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1, I.2 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Adila Biotech Pvt. Ltd"
PRODUCT:"Asth Prash"

COMPLAINT:

"1. Effect starts within 3 days. 2. Sure shot Medicine for respiratory diseases."

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objections raised in the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. 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, “Effect starts within 3 days”, and “Sure shot Medicine for respiratory diseases”, were not substantiated with evidence for product efficacy, or any clinical studies and are misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Bhatia Global Hospital & Endosurgery Institute"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“Now get freedom from obesity”

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 responded requesting for an extension of time for submission of their response. In their response for the basis of the claim, the advertiser stated that their clinic is registered for Allopathy, and that Bariatric Surgery is included in the defined services for this hospital. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. The CCC noted that the advertisement promises freedom from obesity, however the Advertiser has not provided any supporting data for the same. In the absence of claim support data, the CCC concluded that the claim (in Hindi) as translated in English, “Now get freedom from obesity”, was not substantiated with clinical evidence among statistically significant number of people, and is misleading by exaggeration. Also, efficacy being depicted via images of before and after the treatment are misleading. Specific to the claims implying cure from obesity, the advertisement is in Breach of the law as it violated The Drugs & Magic Remedies Act (item 38 under DMR schedule). The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1, I.4 and III.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Dindayal Industries Ltd."
PRODUCT: "Dindayal Industries Ltd."

COMPLAINT:

"1. Energising Tablet Specially for Women 2. An Effective Energy Booster, Stamina and Powerful tablets with the added Goodness of gold, Silver, Pearl, Saffron, the time tested elements that energise and revitalize the body 3. Outstanding Achievement Award – 2016 (For Ayurveda)"

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. The CCC noted that, the product is composed of several ingredients and compound formulation in different quantities. The advertiser has provided justification based on citation from Ayurvedic texts for each ingredient only. These references have relevance if each used in prescribed quantity, form and mode of administration. Though the advertisement is general in nature (Urja, Umang and Josh and Energizing Specially for women) the explanations provided are about specific diseases of women. The claim of Urja, Umang and Josh and Energizing Specially for women, are neither defined nor substantiated for its relevance or benefits. The product specific composition is not justified. No specific data is provided of effectiveness of this product. Based on this assessment, the CCC concluded that the claims (in Hindi) as translated in English, “Energising Tablet Specially for Women”, and “An Effective Energy Booster, Stamina and Powerful tablets with the added Goodness of gold, Silver, Pearl, Saffron, the time tested elements that energise and revitalize the body”, were inadequately substantiated, and are misleading. While the advertiser said that the “Outstanding Achievement Award – 2016 (For Ayurveda)” was granted to them by Federation of MP Chamber of Commerce and Industry, it was not substantiated with details regarding the award such as copy of the award / certificate etc. The advertisement is misleading by omission of a disclaimer to qualify this claim. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1, I.2 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Vee Care Marketing World Pvt Ltd"
PRODUCT: "Vee Care Ayurveda Range of Products"

COMPLAINT:

“Reduce Sugar, otherwise get your money back.**”

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 wherein the advertiser indicates that it is their first advertisement and would not be repeated. In the absence of claim support data, the CCC concluded that the claim (in Hindi) as translated in English, “Reduce Sugar, otherwise get your money back.**”, was not substantiated and is misleading by exaggeration. Also, specific to the claims implying treatment for Diabetes, 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: "Universal Coaching Centre"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"“Bangalore’s No1 Training Centre.”"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

""The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the TVC. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “Bangalore’s No1 Training Centre”, was not substantiated with comparative data versus other similar institutes in the same category or any third party validation or research to prove this claim. Also, the claim is misleading by exaggeration. The TVC contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.""

 

COMPANY: "Wipro Consumer Care & Lighting"
PRODUCT:"Glucovita Bolts"

COMPLAINT:

"Glucovita Gold ads of boy running faster then Dog after eating the product is absolutely misleading. My child unnecessarily demands the product because of the misleading Ad."

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: NOT UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the TVC and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser states that the visual depiction is a creative visualization of outrunning the dog, to establish that the boy is able to run in a humorous way. In the context of this TVC showing the boy running at an unbelievable speed, the CCC concluded that the visual is an obvious exaggeration to be seen as hyperbole intended to catch the eye of the consumer. The complaint was NOT UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Cargill India Pvt. Ltd."
PRODUCT:"Nature Fresh Professional Best Fry Premium Frying Oil"

COMPLAINT:

"“1. Blended Edible Vegetable Oil has been described and presented as Professional Best Fry Premium Frying Oil which is creating erroneous impression regarding its character. 2. Use of expressions Professional Best Fry Premium Frying Oil on label is exaggeration of the quality of the product”"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The advertiser was granted an extension of five days to the standard lead time of seven days to submit their reply in response to their request for extension of 30 days. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. As claim support data, the advertiser provided a copy of their trademark application filed with the Registrar of Trademarks for the purpose of registration of the said label containing the said expression – Professional Best Fry Premium Frying Oil, references/articles from scientific publications, and a technical opinion of an expert from ICT, Mumbai that suggests that blend of Soyabean oil with Palmolein oil has better stability than Soyabean oil alone and hence should be considered as “Premium”. The claim support data was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC viewed the product packaging and considered the Advertiser’s response as well as opinion of the Technical expert presented at the meeting. The CCC was of the view that while the advertiser has applied for the trademark for the product name, it has not been granted to them. Also the "Applied for trademark" “Professional Best Fry Premium Frying Oil” is likely to be perceived by the consumer as product claim. The CCC noted that the Advertiser has not supported this terminology with actual frying trial comparisons to prove that their product is the “best” among all other oils in the market for frying. Also, the term “Professional” was considered to be misleading by ambiguity in the context of this claim. The CCC concluded that the claim, “Professional Best Fry Premium Frying Oil”, was inadequately substantiated with comparison data with other blended oils, and is misleading by ambiguity and implication. The product packaging claim contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"AB Inbev India Private Limited"
PRODUCT:"Budweiser"

COMPLAINT:

“Video embedded in a promoted tweet making a series of statements. Claims to be an advertisement for Music CDs but adds the hash tag #brewedthehardway. Clearly a surrogate for a brew called beer”

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 for this complaint. The CCC viewed the twitter advertisement. Based on the reference to Music CDs, the CCC concluded that the advertisement was a surrogate Ad for a promotion of a liquor product – Budweiser Beer. The advertisement is misleading by implication and contravened Chapters I.4 and III.6(b) of the ASCI Code (“Whether there exists in the advertisement under complaint any direct or indirect clues or cues which could suggest to consumers that it is a direct or indirect advertisement for the product whose advertising is restricted by this Code.) Also, the Ad did not meet the requirements as per ASCI's Guidelines for Qualification of Brand Extension Product or Service and thereby contravened Chapter III.6 (a) of the ASCI Code (“Whether the unrestricted product which is purportedly sought to be promoted through the advertisement under the complaint is produced and distributed in reasonable quantities, having regard to the scale of the advertising in question, the media used and the markets targeted.”). It was also observed that the Twitter homepage also shows the beer bottle which is in contravention of Chapter III.4 of the ASCI code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Cargill India P. Ltd"
PRODUCT:"Nature Fresh Acti-Lite Cooking Oil"

COMPLAINT:

"1. Using the oil makes a father a good father 2. Low fat cooking 3. Lite on food 4. Low oil absorption 5. Using the oil makes you stay active every moment"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"“The TVC shows a father playing with his daughter and going cycling and camping with her. The song playing in the background says in Hindi- We make a father a good father. This seems to be the tagline of the entire TVC and it stretches a viewers credibility to link it with a cooking oil! The TVC ends by saying - Stay active every moment. Claims: 1. Using the oil makes a father a good father 2. Low fat cooking 3. Lite on food 4. Low oil absorption 5. Using the oil makes you stay active every moment Our objections: 1 How can using a particular cooking oil make someone a better father. The claim is far-fetched. 2 The TVC conveys that claims ii and iii are dependent on claim iv. The super connected with claim iv says- The oil contains DMPS which lead to less oil absorption. What is DMPS. How does it lead to less oil absorption. Also, are we talking about food absorbing less oil or the body. There is no clarity on the last aspect. 3 Is this the only oil that contains DMPS. If not, the advt is misleading by omission. 4 The super with claim iv says - In comparison with select oils under select conditions. What are these select oils and select conditions. 5 Can the company substantiate claims ii, iii and iv by giving reports from independentagencies. 6 The supers are barely readable. The print is too small and they are shown for too short a time.”"

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 responded requesting for 30 days extension of time for submission of their response. Since the complaints have to be processed in a time bound manner as per the CCC procedure that the advertiser is familiar with and requests from the advertiser for an extension being of repetitive nature, the advertiser was not granted an extension. The CCC viewed the TVC. In the absence of claim support data, the CCC concluded that the claims, “Low fat cooking”, “Lite on food”, and “Low oil absorption”, were not substantiated with any evidence or technical test reports and are misleading. The disclaimers in the TVC were not clearly legible. Also, the supers in the Hindi TVC were not in the same language as the audio of the TVC. The TVC contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the Code, and ASCI Guidelines on Supers. This complaint was UPHELD. The claims, “Using the oil makes a father a good father” and “Using the oil makes you stay active every moment”, were not considered to be objectionable. This complaint was NOT UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Panasonic India Pvt. Ltd"
PRODUCT:"Panasonic Life Conditioners"

COMPLAINT:

"“1. Healthier 99 percent cleaner air 2. Nanoe-g 3. PM 2.5 air purification 4. Smarter 65 percent energy saving 5. Faster 36 percent quicker cooling”"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"Our objections: 1. What is meant by Healthier 99 percent clean air. This is in comparison to what. The claim is subjective and needs substantiation. Is this feature unique to this brand. If not then the claim is misleading. 2.What is nanoe-g. Is it recognized by an independent agency and certified by a competent authority. Is the technology unique to this brand? If not then the claim is misleading. 3. What is PM 2.5 Filtration. This claim needs to be substantiated and certified by a competent authority. Is the technology (PM 2.5 Filtration) unique to this brand. If not then the claim is misleading. 4. How does the ad claim Smarter 65 percent energy saving. This is in comparison to what? The claim is subjective and needs substantiation. Is the technology unique to this brand. If not then the claim is misleading. 5. How does the ad claim Faster 36 percent quicker cooling. This is in comparison to what. The claim is subjective and needs substantiation. Is the technology unique to this brand. If not then the claim is misleading. 6. Claims 1-5 are not substantiated with independent research data. We propose immediate withdrawal of the advertisement"

Recommendation: UPHELD

"On receiving the CCC’s recommendation, the advertiser responded with a request for a personal hearing. The advertiser representatives were given personal hearing by ASCI, at which time the advertiser submitted the Nanoe-G presentation and details of how it works. Advertiser states that Nanoe-G is a technology which works effectively on airborne, adhesive and in-filter micro-organisms such as bacteria, viruses and mould ensuring a cleaner living environment, and this technology is recognised by Japan Patent Office and is unique to this brand. As claim support data, the advertiser provided list of patent applications and technical explanation of Nanoe-G. 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 CCC noted that advertiser is using a coined word “Nanoe-G” to describe “fine particles consisting of ions and radicals”; While the AC may have the capacity to remove dust and kill bacteria due to Negative ions being emitted, the reference to “Nano” is misleading by ambiguity and implication as negative ions are not considered as Nano particles. The CCC concluded that the claim, “Nanoe-G technology” implied that product was based on Nano Technology but there was no data substantiating that and therefore is misleading by ambiguity and implication. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the Code. The CCC recommendation of complaint being Upheld stands on Review."

 

COMPANY:"GlaxoSmithKline Consumer Healthcare Ltd"
PRODUCT:"Horlicks"

COMPLAINT:

"“Horlicks has immune-nutrients that makes your child Taller, Stronger & Sharper” “Strong inside. Taller, Stronger, Sharper outside Complaint 1: “Horlicks advt says, it had immunonutrients which make your child taller, stronger & sharper. 16 year old study was cited. Horlicks advt says, it had immunonutrients which make your child taller, stronger & sharper. Height, body built & IQ are largely decided by genetics & a minor part played by environment and level of nutrition. Horlicks had no miracle power to increase height, improve physique & IQ of nutritionally normal children. These 3 factors are affected in diseased condition like Protein Energy Malnutrition & in that case, child need special food as advised by doctors but not Horlicks. So Horlicks claims doesn't hold good in diseased children too. Also the claim was based on a study in 1999-2000. 16 years passed and a lot of changes happening. It seems Horlicks had choosen a very old study which suited the claims.” Complaint 2: “Strong inside. Taller, Stronger, Sharper outside The above claim is said to be substantiated based on a study published in Journal of Nutrition in 1999-2000. A claim is also made that doubling content of selenium and vitamin D doubles immunoprotection 1. No scientific evidence that micronutrient supplementation changes growth and strength parameters. In fact a study by Kurpad and others from St John's has shown no effect on physical parameters 2. No scientific evidence showing that doubling selenium and vitamin D in the given range confers any immune benefit”"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"On receiving the CCC’s recommendation, the advertiser responded with a request for a personal hearing. The advertiser representatives were given personal hearing by ASCI, and subsequently, the Advertiser submitted their response for Review. Advertiser states that the term ""immuno-nutrients"" is a creative rendition of ""nutrients having functional role in maintaining immune function"". ""2x higher immuno-nutrients that help support your child's immunity” is a nutrient function claim that is based on the physiological role of such nutrients, as accepted in scientific literature. The claim support data by the advertiser was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response as well as opinion of the Technical expert presented at the meeting. The CCC noted that while the advertiser intends to communicate that the product “helps support immunity”, the new advertisement overly emphasizes the words Immune / Immunity apart from the fact that 2X / double the amounts of Vitamin D and Selenium are added. In the context of the advertisement and its presentation, this is likely to impress on the minds of gullible consumer a claim of development / enhancement of immunity. As per the advertiser the term “immuno nutrition” is known to be the study of the effects of nutrients, including macronutrients, vitamins, minerals, and trace elements on inflammation, the actions of white blood cells, the formation of antibodies, and the resistance to disease. However, the CCC members observed that this definition very clearly refers to study of effects and does not support the attempt to call all these nutrients as “immuno-nutrients”. The CCC members opined that converting of simple “nutrient” word to “immune-nutrient” is misleading by ambiguity and implication. The CCC concluded that the claims, “Horlicks now has 2 times higher immune-nutrients, that helps support your child’s immunity and make him taller, stronger, sharper”, “Strong inside. Taller, Stronger, Sharper outside”, were inadequately substantiated (in the context of immunity related claims) and are misleading by implication of enhancement of immunity. The advertisement was also misleading by ambiguity and omission of clear demarcation of two separate disclaimers for two distinct claims. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The CCC recommendation of complaint being Upheld stands on Review."

 

COMPANY: "GlaxoSmithKline Consumer Healthcare Ltd"
PRODUCT:"Horlicks Growth"

COMPLAINT:

"1. Catch- Up on lost Growth 2. New Horlicks Growth+ naturally enhances bone growth* so that both height and weight increase in a healthy way 3. See visible difference in 6 months."

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"I came across this claim by Horlicks (attached), with reference to a scientific article, which I checked out. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jpeds.2014.08.011. This is a study from Spain. There is no mention of the the supplement used (though I admit I didn't purchase access to the whole article)."

Recommendation: UPHELD

"On receiving the CCC’s recommendation, the advertiser responded with a request for a personal hearing. The advertiser representatives were given personal hearing by ASCI, at which time they informed that the claims made are basis the study in Israel in 2014 aimed at children between 3-9 years and below 10 percentile growth chart. Advertiser submitted their response for Review with additional data in which they state that the claim, “Catch- Up on lost Growth. See visible difference in 6 months” articulates the outcome/ result of the study for consumer understanding of the benefit of product. The claim that the product ""naturally enhances bone growth"" is supported by the fact that increase in height is due to skeletal growth or bone growth, which is supported by the fact that author of the study has concluded that the increase in height and weight happened without ""obesogenic"" effect, as there was insignificant change in BMI SDS in children who consumed the formula. The claim support data by the advertiser was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response as well as opinion of the Technical expert presented at the meeting. The CCC noted that in the context of the advertisement, the claims, “Catch- Up on lost Growth”, and “See visible difference in 6 months”, “New Horlicks Growth+ enhances bone growth* so that both height and weight increase in a healthy way” were substantiated basis the study findings. This complaint is Not Upheld on Review. The CCC observed that the advertisement uses the word “naturally” (“New Horlicks Growth+ naturally enhances bone growth*…..”) and “Naturally” implies ""Natural"" growth without any artificial inputs. The use of this word ""naturally"" for an artificially composed drink supplemented in overall food intake is likely to mislead the consumers by ambiguity. The advertisement contravened Chapter I.4 of the Code. This CCC recommendation of complaint being Upheld stands on Review for the wording “Naturally”."

 

COMPANY:"Cipla Health Limited"
PRODUCT:"Nicotex Gum"

COMPLAINT:

“Nicotex helps you to quit smoking and whitens your teeth too”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

“Claiming nicotine with teeth whitening. I am consumer of Nicotex 2mg by Cipla contains are Nicotine Polacrilex USP (equivalent to Nicotine).2 mg, previously the price was of Rs. 59, after they changed packing and price is raised by Rs. 10 and now it is of Rs. 69 they are claiming teeth whitening is added I have checked the Composition are same Nicotine Polacrilex USP (equivalent to Nicotine).. 2 mg so my question if there is no composition changed and not added any new contents in composition how they are claiming with teeth whitening and why the raised price by rs.10”

Recommendation: NOT UPHELD

"The CCC viewed the TVC and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser states that Nicotex Teeth Whitening 2 mgs is different from Nicotex 2 mg (Other variant) since it contains Sodium Bicarbonate• (Baking Soda) which is a common ingredient used in Whitening products and as per regulatory requirements, only active Product ingredient (API) needs to be displayed on the pack & not the excipient. The CCC observed that in case of Nicotex, Nicotine Polacrilex USP is the key active ingredient whereas Sodium Bicarbonate is an inactive ingredient (excipient) as declared in the product leaflet. The complaint was NOT UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Reliance Jio Infocomm Ltd"
PRODUCT:"Reliance Jio Digital Life"

COMPLAINT:

“Free Voice Calls To Any Network Across India”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: NOT UPHELD

"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 states that free voice calling facilities (domestic calls only) are provided to all their subscribers availing the All-in One packs. These voice calls are free as no specific charges are apportioned towards domestic voice calling and no data is deducted from the data allocation in the account of the customer for voice calling. The data which is provided to the customer as per the relevant plan is utilized only upon the customer utilizing services which traditionally consume data (including for voice over internet protocol calls, also known as ‘VoIP calls’). As claim support data, the advertiser provided details of all 10 “All-in-One” plans made available by them. The CCC concluded that the claim, “Free Voice Calls To Any Network Across India”, is not false and misleading. The complaints were NOT UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Xiaomi Technology India Private Limited"
PRODUCT:"Kevlar Fiber Cable"

COMPLAINT:

“Durable, break-resistant Kevlar fiber cable”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"In their headphones accessory page they have given a false line "Break-resistant" cable means the cable last long without any problem but in contrast to that it doesn't, it gets demaged even within the warranty period that is in 2months short period itself it gets demaged. Questioned them to justify it but there was only irresponsible same template answers by their support team. URL: http://mobile.mi.com/in/headphonespro/ Screenshot of the false advertisement. Requesting you to take a strict action against them and please do help me in getting the justice against the product which I bought from their website just because of the false line "Break-resistant."

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 through their Advocates. The CCC viewed the website advertisement and considered the Advocate’s response on behalf of the advertiser. Advocate states that the product uses a cable that comprises of Kevlar fiber, which significantly increases the tensile strength of the cable, and makes it difficult to break, and is therefore advertised as break-resistant. The CCC noted that the Advocate, on behalf of the advertiser, has only given assertions about product benefits but has not provided any evidence of product performance nor any technical test report regarding the product’s break resistant properties. In the absence of claim support data, the CCC concluded that the claim, “Durable, break-resistant Kevlar fiber cable”, was not substantiated and is misleading. The website advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Herb On Naturals "
PRODUCT:"Herb On SHAPE"

COMPLAINT:

"1. Loose weight faster 2. Burns fat- Help prevent fat buildups 3. Controls appetite- Reduces Overeating 4. Corrects mood- Reduces calorie intake 5. Ignites Metabolism- decreases your belly fat 6. No side effects"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"“Please allow me to bring to your kind notice that there is a company Herbon Naturals in Delhi. The have released the enclosed ad of their product Herbon shape on 4th September in news paper Navbharat Times in Delhi and NCR. I want to highlight here that the released ad is completely misleading as it claims for losing weight faster, Prevention of fat buildup, Reduction of Over eating, Reduction of calorie intake, Decreasing the belly fat and no side effects. Please note that the aforesaid ad even doesnt mention the hazard possible with pregnant woman if she consume this medicine. Biggest of all the ad is a clear cut contravention to the Magic remedy act for cure and prevention of Obesity. I humbly request you to take immediate action against the company for violating the law of the land.”"

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 for this complaint. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims, “Loose weight faster”, “Burns fat- Help prevent fat buildups”, “Controls appetite- Reduces Overeating”, “Corrects mood- Reduces calorie intake”, “Ignites Metabolism- decreases your belly fat”, “No side effects”, were not substantiated with proof of efficacy of the product, and are misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Cl Educate Ltd "
PRODUCT: "CAT 16/17 by Career Launcher"

COMPLAINT:

"17148 IIM Calls received by CLites in CAT 2015"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"“Advertisement released is for CAT 2016 / 2017 comprehensive classroom coaching by Career Launcher institute. In this advertisement, Career Launcher has claimed ""17148 IIM Calls received by CLites in CAT 2015"". This advertisement has been released many times by them during these days.There is no evidence for the claim/ result CL makes and this claim may be misleading. a) They have not clarified whether these are final admission calls or just Group discussion / interview calls? Even if these are only interview calls, then also they are misguiding IIM aspirants as the IIMs have already released the final admission offers / selections by the end of June 2016. So, why they are not publicising their final selection results? b) They have not given any information about the total number of their students who have got these many calls. Just mentioning 17148 calls, which looks very unrealistic number, without revealing the number of students, is misleading. b) there is no third party validation source mentioned in claiming these results. Request you to please ask career launcher institute to substantiate the claim used in their advertisement with necessary support data and independent third party validation. I think it certainly voilates the ASCI's guidelines for educational institutions. In the past too, they made such vague claims and they could not substantiate/ prove their results. So, they must be asked to substantiate this claimed results as well. Their last year's claim of 9629 IIM Calls by CL students in CAT 2014 was also found to be misleading and the same was upheld by ASCI in December'2015 as mentioned in ASCI's newsletter of December 2015 decisions released in March 2016.”"

Recommendation: NOT UPHELD

"The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. As claim support data, the advertiser provided CAT 2015 audit certificate. The CA certificate states, “We could validate data for a total of 2129 CL students received interview calls from at least one IIM in CAT 2015. The aggregate of calls received by these CL students were 17148 in CAT 2015.” Based on this data, the CCC concluded that the claim, "17148 IIM Calls received by CLites in CAT 2015" was substantiated. The complaint was NOT UPHELD."

 

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

COMPLAINT:

"“Undisputed CAT Champions” “Creating history in CAT year after year” “2301 TIME students into the IIMs along in CAT 2015”"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"“Website banner of CAT claiming undisputed CAT Champions, creating history in CAT year after year and 2301 TIME students into the IIMs along in CAT 2015. 1. CAT claiming undisputed CAT Champions 2. Creating history in CAT year after year 3. 2301 TIME students into the IIMs along in CAT 2015 They cannot claim as 'undisputed champions' and what is the proof of 'creating history' and '2301' result. I think there is some ambiguity in 2301 TIME students in IIMs in CAT 2015 I want justification for it, else banner should be removed.”"

Recommendation: NOT UPHELD

"The CCC viewed the website advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. As claim support data, the advertiser provided details of 2301 T.I.M.E. students who have got 10221 admission offers in CAT 2015, Copies of the enrollment forms for 2301 students, and Copies of letter as proof of their selection. For Claim “The Undisputed CAT Champion” the CCC referred to a complaint received against a similar claim made by the advertiser. Advertiser had then substantiated with comparative data that T.I.M.E. is the proven leader in CAT training. Based on this reference, the CCC concluded that the claim, “The Undisputed CAT Champion”, was not objectionable in absence of any new additional data contrary to the claim. This complaint was NOT UPHELD. For the Claim “Creating history in CAT year after year” , the Advertiser states that the number of the final selections secured by T.I.M.E. students into the IIMs, the number of T.I.M.E. students securing final selections into the IIMs, and number of T.I.M.E. students getting 100 percentile in CAT have increased year after year. The CCC did not consider this claim to be objectionable and considered it as a puffery. This complaint was NOT UPHELD. For the Claim “2301 TIME students into the IIMs alone in CAT 2015”, the Advertiser states that the said results have been audited and validated by a reputed chartered Accountancy. As claim support data, the advertiser provided a copy of the CA certificate validating the results. The CCC concluded that the claim, “2301 TIME students into the IIMs alone in CAT 2015”, was substantiated. This complaint was NOT UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "State Bank of India"
PRODUCT: "Type of Property, net annual Income & Minimum Loan amount"

COMPLAINT:

"Kindly refer https://www.sbi.co.in/portal/web/personal-banking/loans-againstproperty Salient features of advert & Property Loan Scheme All-Purpose loan against mortgage of any of your property.& Eligibility An individual who is; Engaged in agricultural and allied activities-or Net Annual Income (others) is in excess of Rs.1,50,000/-.Loan Amount Minimum: Rs.25,000/- APPLY NOW ONLINE KINDLY REFER URL https://onlineapply.sbi.co.in/personalbanking/personal-loan REDIRECTED TO LOAN AGAINST IMMOVABLE PROPERTY https://www.sbi.co.in/portal/web/personal-banking/loan-againstmortgage-of-immovable SALIENT FEATURES Income : Minimum Net Monthly Income of Rs. 25,000/ (or Rs. 3 lacs per annum). Loan Amount (i) Minimum Loan Amount: Rs. 10 lacs Security Equitable mortgage of non-encumbered, non-agricultural and SERFAESI compliant residential house/flat in the name of borrowers/guarantors. However, loan under this scheme will not be made available on mortgage of an open plot https://www.sbi.co.in/portal/web/personalbanking/loans-against-property  Basic grievance is in loan against property url https://www.sbi.co.in/portal/web/personal-banking/loans-against-property certain details are given, on applying online the form is for loans against immovable property refer url https://www.sbi.co.in/portal/web/personal-banking/loan-against-mortgage-of immovable where the terms are different than that what is advertised Your branch refuses to honour the terms advertised in https://www.sbi.co.in/portal/web/personal-banking/loans-against-property and insists on terms in https://www.sbi.co.in/portal/web/personal-banking/loan-against-mortgage-of-immovable Are loan against property and loan against immovable property different? if same why different terms are available please refer screen shots for different terms  Kindly find attached a presentation in power point of my complaint To summarize after logging on to sbi website /personal banking tab/personal finance tab/loans against property/advertisement says 3 major points of difference Property Loan Scheme Avail of an All-Purpose loan against mortgage of any of your property Eligibility Engaged in agricultural and allied activities. B. Your Net Monthly Income (salaried) is in excess of Rs.12,000/- or Net Annual Income (others) is in excess of Rs.1,50,000/-. Salient Features Loan Amount Minimum: Rs.25,000 when applying online, we are requested to read scheme details before applying scheme details Income : Minimum Net Monthly Income of Rs. 25,000/ (or Rs. 3 lacs per annum).advertised as 12000 or rs 150000 per annum Salient Features Loan Amount (i)Minimum Loan Amount: Rs. 10 lacs advertised as 25000 (ii)loan under this scheme will not be made available on mortgage of an open plot ADVERTISED AS any of your property complaint is advertisement says something and scheme terms and conditions says differently, mainly on 3 counts CONFIDENTIAL Page 19 of 38 type of property, nett annual income and minumum loan amount slides 3 and 4 are the advertisement slides 10 and 12 are the terms slide 11 is differences in advert and terms The following is the response to my complaint. However I have received different information from your officers . Request clarification on factual position. Is the loan against property advertised under url https://www.sbi.co.in/portal/web/personal-banking/loans-against-property and loans against immovable property advertise in url https://www.sbi.co.in/portal/web/personal-banking/loan-against-mortgage-of-immovable the same product or are they different products as advised by ASCI The response recieved from your officers are appended below You will appreciate the dichotomy. If they are different products, why is your Bank not entertaining application for loan against property and insisting on terms in loans against immovable property? If it is the same product (old product) and there are changes in the product as stipulated by your officer, why is the old product being advertised? Would appreciate clarification Kindly note SBI Stand that it is old product, there are changes in the product but old product is still being advertised. Reply from SBI addressed to the complainant Product reflected under url https://www.sbi.co.in/portal/web/personal-banking/loans-against-property is old product. Now there are changes in the product and it is reflected under url https://www.sbi.co.in/portal/web/personal-banking/loan-against-mortgage-of-immovable ."

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 for this complaint. The CCC viewed the website advertisement and response the advertiser sent to the complainant. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser addressed to ASCI, the CCC concluded that the product/service advertised under url provided by the complainant ( https://www.sbi.co.in/portal/web/personal-banking/loans-against-property) is false and misleading as it is an old product/service being advertised. The website advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Amplifon India Pvt Ltd"
PRODUCT:"Hearing aid"

COMPLAINT:

"1. World’s largest hearing care service provider in 22 countries. 2. Over 180 clinics with experienced audiologists. 3. Hearing Tests and Hearing Aids fitting done using world class technology. 4. Free Aftercare Service for lifetime."

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"1. How does Amplifon claim to be World’s largest hearing care service provider in 22 countries. Is there data from independent studies to prove this claim. 2. Claims 1-4 should be substantiated with independent research data. Informatively, CERC had complained about this advertisement in April 2016 - Ref. 420164140. ASCI had upheld several of our objections. ASCI also said that the advertiser has agreed to modify the advertisement suitably. Considering that the advertiser has not made modifications to the claims in new copy of the advertisement, we request you to kindly take this complaint on urgent basis and ask the advertiser to withdraw the ad."

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 for this complaint, despite a reminder. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “World’s largest hearing care service provider in 22 countries”, was not substantiated with data comparing the market share of the advertiser versus other similar companies and is misleading by exaggeration. Advertiser did not provide list of clinics along with the name of the Audiologist at the clinic nor proof of their staff being audiologists with their experience certificates. The claim, “Over 180 clinics with experienced audiologists”, was not substantiated and is misleading. Claim, “Free Aftercare Service for lifetime”, was not substantiated with details of the free service being offered by the advertiser. Also, the claim is misleading by omission of the condition for the service offered. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. This complaint was UPHELD. Claim, “Hearing Tests and Hearing Aids fitting done using world class technology”, was taken up for deliberation in Complaint No. 1605-C.337. As claim support data, the Advertiser provided information brochure of the equipment used for Hearing test. This data was acceptable and hence this complaint was NOT UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Usha International Ltd"
PRODUCT:"Usha Fans"

COMPLAINT:

“Reigning national champion for over 60 years”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"“We would like to your notice that in the below link of Usha Fans latest commercial, the voice over says “Saina Nehwal.. World Champion…about to play the toughest match of her life…. Against a reigning national champion for over 60 years” and then a shot of Usha Fans is shown. We would like to know whether this claim of being a reigning national champion for the last 60 years, has been substantiated by USHA FANS as it can be interpreted as they are the leading player of fans for the last 60 years, which they are clearly not. Would appreciate if you could take up the matter with USHA & check whether the same has been substantiated and report to us.” Link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MUDcVW4_ioQ.”"

 

COMPANY: "Aghin Chemicals "
PRODUCT: "Sun Plus Aquamatic "

COMPLAINT:

"“New Sun Plus Aquamatic detergent powder keeps your clothes bright, fixes the original colours and leaves them fragranced throughout the day!” “Sun Plus Aquamatic detergent powder is the superior, more powerful and the unique washing formula than any other detergent available so far.”"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"“The following claims of the Advertiser referred above are unsubstantiated as well as highly misleading to consumers. The reasons for the same have been elaborated below: a) Claim: “New Sun Plus Aquamatic detergent powder keeps your clothes bright, fixes the original colours and leaves them fragranced throughout the day!” Detergent products cannot fix original colours of clothes and apparels as claimed by the Advertiser. We submit that the Advertiser is required to substantiate through appropriate tests on claims that the product can fix original colours of used clothes and as well retain the fragrance throughout the day. b) Claim: “Sun Plus Aquamatic detergent powder is the superior, more powerful and the unique washing formula than any other detergent available so far.” The above claim infers that the Advertiser’s Sun Plus Aquamatic is superior than all the other detergent products available in the market. 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. We submit that the Advertiser is making an unsubstantiated claim and should be put to strict proof to establish through comparative testing against all available detergent products available in the market..”"

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 for this complaint. The CCC viewed the product packaging. The advertiser did not submit any data regarding product efficacy or it’s superiority versus other marketed products. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “New Sun Plus Aquamatic detergent powder keeps your clothes bright, fixes the original colours and leaves them fragranced throughout the day!”, was not substantiated with technical tests/trials report and with product efficacy data. The claim, “Sun Plus Aquamatic detergent powder is the superior, more powerful and the unique washing formula than any other detergent available so far”, was not substantiated with comparative data versus other similar detergents in the same category. Also, the claims are misleading. The product packaging contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Air India Ltd "
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

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 for this complaint. The CCC viewed the advertisement - hoarding. Advertiser did not provide comparative data to prove that they offer more leg space, hot meals and more luggage allowance than their competitor airlines whereas the complainant provided data to indicate that the claim being made in the advertisement such as reference to leg space was incorrect. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims, “How do some of our friends react when their passengers discover that we offer more leg space, hot meals and more luggage allowance?......” . ... .... With INDIGnation!”, was not substantiated. Also, the advertisement – hoarding is misleading and by implication unfairly denigrates other competitor airlines. The advertisement – hoarding contravened Chapters I.1, I.4 and IV.1( e ) of the Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Raju Coaching Centre"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“Constable S.I. Job Guarantee or else get your fees back”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “Constable S.I. Job Guarantee or else get your fees back”, was not substantiated with relevant supporting data such as detailed list of students who have been placed through their Institute, contact details of students for verification, enrolment forms and appointment letters received by the students. Also, the advertiser did not provide evidence to prove that fees have been refunded to those who have not been provided with jobs. The claim is misleading by ambiguity. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Ansh Nursing College"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“100% Job Placement”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “100% Job Placement”, was not substantiated with authentic supporting data such as detailed list of students who have been placed through their Institute, contact details of students for verification, enrolment forms and appointment letters received by the students, nor any independent audit or verification certificate. Also, the claim is misleading by exaggeration. The 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:"Unique Permanent Hair Loss Cream"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"1. Get rid of hair for a lifetime through cream by applying the cream twice. 2. Get rid of the hair on face, private parts, chest and waist just by applying the cream twice 3. 100% Ayurvedic. 4. No Itching, No Burning, No Spots, No Black Marks. 5. You will only Benefit from the use if this cream, it has no harmful effects at all. 6. Trusted by 6.5 Cr. Indians."

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the concerned Media (Hindustan) for their assistance in providing the contact details of the advertiser, or to forward the complaint to the advertiser. The CCC noted that no response was received from the advertiser or from the concerned media prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the print advertisement. In the absence of response from the concerned media and comments from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims (in Hindi) as translated in English, “Get rid of hair for a lifetime through cream by applying the cream twice”, “Get rid of the hair on face, private parts, chest and waist just by applying the cream twice”, “100% Ayurvedic”, “No Itching, No Burning, No Spots, No Black Marks”, “You will only Benefit from the use if this cream, it has no harmful effects at all”, were not substantiated with evidence of product efficacy. The claim, “Trusted by 6.5 Cr. Indians”, was not proven with supporting data or with any independent audit or verification certificate. Also, efficacy being depicted via images of before and after the treatment are misleading. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Aarav Speech & Hearing Clinic."
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"1. Complete solution to all the problems related to hearing & speech 2. Speech Therapy for Stammering & Stuttering"

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 post the due date. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser provided details of the clinic; However, did not provide any supporting data for the claims made. In the absence of claim support data, the CCC concluded that the claims (in Hindi) as translated in English, “Complete solution to all the problems related to hearing & speech” was not substantiated with clinical evidence, and are misleading by exaggeration. , and “Speech Therapy for Stammering & Stuttering”, were not substantiated with clinical evidence, and are misleading by exaggeration. Specific to the claims implying cure for deafness (a condition referred in Schedule J item 13 of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act) and reference to stammering and stuttering the advertisement is in Breach of the law as it violated The Drugs & Cosmetics Rule 106 and 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: "Powerlife Wellness Centre"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"1. No Medicines, No Injections, No Radiation, No Operation, No Pain, No Side Effects, 100% Safe 2. Treatment of Diseases without medicine 3. Treatment for Cancer, Diabetes, Depression, Arthritis Etc."

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the concerned Media (The Sandesh Limited) for their assistance in providing the contact details of the advertiser, or to forward the complaint to the advertiser. The CCC noted that no response was received from the advertiser or from the concerned media prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the print advertisement. In the absence of response from the concerned media and comments from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims (in Gujarathi) as translated in English, “No Medicines, No Injections, No Radiation, No Operation, No Pain, No Side Effects, 100% Safe”, “Treatment of Diseases without medicine”, “Treatment for Cancer, Diabetes, Depression, Arthritis Etc”, were not substantiated with clinical evidence, and are misleading by gross exaggeration. Also, specific to the claims related to treatment for Cancer, Diabetes, Arthritis, 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: "Nitikrushna Enterprises"
PRODUCT:"RET Lifeguard RO Water Purifier"

COMPLAINT:

“India's No.1 Water Purifier Company”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim (in Hindi) as translated in English, “India's No.1 Water Purifier Company”, was not substantiated with comparative data versus other similar competitors’ in the same category or any third party validation or research to prove this claim. Also, the claim is misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Ashoka Super Speciality Women Hospital"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"1. Two times Limca Book of World Record for Successful treatment of thousands of childless couples in 25 years, Country’s First Test tube Baby Centre 2. Most Successful 3. Time Lapse System – Success Rate 60% to 70%"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The advertiser was granted an extension of five days to the standard lead time of seven days to submit their reply in response to their request for extension of 15 to 20 days. The advertiser representatives were given personal hearing by ASCI. Advertiser’s preliminary response raised a query for the By-laws and Registration number of ASCI. ASCI responded to their query and referred them to the website of gama.gov.in. Advertiser subsequently responded and as claim support data, provided an article on time lapse system of success rate of IVF, and copy of certificate of Limca Book of Records of 2002 and 2003. The CCC reviewed this data, and concluded that the claims (in Hindi) as translated in English, “Two times Limca Book of World Record for Successful treatment of thousands of childless couples in 25 years, Country’s First Test tube Baby Centre”, “Most Successful”, and “Time Lapse System – Success Rate 60% to 70%”, were inadequately substantiated with authentic supporting data, comparison with other similar hospitals and are misleading by exaggeration. Specific to the claims related to successful treatment for childless couple (implying successful treatment of infertility), 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: "Sahas Homeo Clinic and Medical Store"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"Are you suffering from Kidney Stone? Cure for Kidney Stone is possible without operation b. If you are suffering from any incurable diseases come to us we will help you to get cured with our Homeopathic Treatment "

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 through their Advocates. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advocate’s response. Advocate states that the advertiser has only published that any patient who is suffering from any incurable diseases may be cured by Homeopathy treatment. The CCC noted that the Advertiser did not provide any supporting data for the claims made. In the absence of claim support data, the CCC concluded that the claims (in Hindi) as translated in English, “Are you suffering from Kidney Stone? Cure for Kidney Stone is possible without operation”, and “If you are suffering from any incurable diseases come to us we will help you to get cured with our Homeopathic Treatment”, were not substantiated with clinical evidence, and are misleading by exaggeration. Specific to the claims related to cure for Kidney stone, 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: "Geetanjali Hospital"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"1. Upto 90% Successful Surgery 2. To detect cancer is easy but to Cure / Treat is? Getting it Diagnosed at the right time can help cure your cancer 3. 1st time in India cure for cancer by FFF Radiosurgery 4. Cancer cells completely destroyed 5. Lung and Spinal cancer can be treated within 3 minutes 6. Brain Cancer can be cured within 2 minutes"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objections raised in the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. 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, “Upto 90% Successful Surgery”, “To detect cancer is easy but to Cure / Treat is? Getting it Diagnosed at the right time can help cure your cancer”, “1st time in India cure for cancer by FFF Radiosurgery”, “Cancer cells completely destroyed”, “Lung and Spinal cancer can be treated within 3 minutes”, “Brain Cancer can be cured within 2 minutes”, were not substantiated with clinical evidence, and are misleading by gross exaggeration. Specific to the claims related to treatment/cure for Cancer, Lung and Spinal cancer, Brain Cancer, 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: "Ambica Ayurved "
PRODUCT:"Nav Paurush Capsule & Powder"

COMPLAINT:

“Helps in removing the weakness, gaining weight, helps in body building”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the advertisements. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim (in Hindi) as translated in English, “Helps in removing the weakness, gaining weight, helps in body building”, was not substantiated with evidence of product efficacy, and is misleading by exaggeration. The advertisements contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Arogya India Pharmacy"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“This medicine removes diabetes by developing insulin.”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim (in Hindi) as translated in English, “This medicine removes diabetes by developing insulin”, was not substantiated with clinical evidence of product efficacy, and is misleading by exaggeration. Specific to the claims implying cure of diabetes, the advertisement is in Breach of the law as it violated The Drugs & Magic Remedies Act. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1, I.1 and III.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Khushi Ayurveda Pvt Ltd"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"1. Lose Weight without any Yoga, without dieting in just 45 days. 2. If you don't find any benefit, get your fees back. 3. After The Deep Research In Ayurveda From Past Many Years, KHUSHI AYURVEDA PVT LTD Has Come Out With A Unique Medicine With Which You Can Lose Weight Without Any Restriction"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objections raised in the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. 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, “Lose Weight without any Yoga, without dieting in just 45 days”, “After The Deep Research In Ayurveda From Past Many Years, KHUSHI AYURVEDA PVT LTD Has Come Out With A Unique Medicine With Which You Can Lose Weight Without Any Restriction”, were not substantiated with product efficacy data. The claim, “If you don't find any benefit, get your fees back”, was not substantiated with evidence to prove that fees have been refunded to those who have not been benefitted by the product. The claims are misleading by exaggeration and ambiguity. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "American Skin and Dental Centre"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"1. Only safe & sure treatment of Baldness/Eyebrows/Less hair in beards”. 2. Through PRP (Platelets Rich Plasma Cells) get 500 percent growth with one vaccination"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objections raised in the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. 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, “Only safe & sure treatment of Baldness/Eyebrows/Less hair in beards”, and “Through PRP (Platelets Rich Plasma Cells) get 500 percent growth with one vaccination”, were not substantiated with clinical evidence, and are misleading by exaggeration. Specific to the claims related to sure treatment of Baldness implying a cure, (a condition 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. Also, efficacy being depicted via images of before and after the treatment are misleading. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1, I.4 and III.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Limra Active Viwing & Laser Skin Care Centre"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"1. Remove baldness in 2 hours (Before and After Visuals is Misleading) 2. Loose 1 & half kg weight in just 1 hour without medicine 3. Loose 1& half kg waist in just 1 hour without medicine 4. Get Rid of Spots and Scars of Chicken Pox"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objections raised in the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. 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, “Remove baldness in 2 hours”, “Loose 1 & half kg weight in just 1 hour without medicine”, “Loose 1& half kg waist in just 1 hour without medicine”, and “Get Rid of Spots and Scars of Chicken Pox”, were not substantiated with clinical evidence, and are misleading. Specific to the claims implying cure of baldness (a condition 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. Efficacy being depicted via images of before and after the treatment for baldness in the advertisement are misleading. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1, I.4 and III.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Dr Danish Khan Wellness Clinic"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"1. First time in North India Instant & Permanent relief from pain through German technique matrix rhythm therapy in just 1-8 sitting 2. Reduce 10 kg in just one month 3. The Biggest Multi Speciality Physiotherapy Hospital in North India"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objections raised in the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim (in Hindi) as translated in English, “First time in North India Instant & Permanent relief from pain through German technique matrix rhythm therapy in just 1-8 sitting”, were not substantiated with authentic supporting evidence. Claim, “Reduce 10 kg in just one month”, was not substantiated with clinical evidence. Claim, The Biggest Multi Speciality Physiotherapy Hospital in North India”, was not substantiated with comparative data versus other similar institutes in the same category or any third party validation or research to prove this claim. Also, the claims are misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Vardhan Ayurvedic Organisation"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“Permanently cure joint pain at home itself without any operation”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the TVC. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim (in Hindi) as translated in English, “Permanently cure joint pain at home itself without any operation”, was not substantiated with supporting clinical evidence, and is misleading by exaggeration. The TVC contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "GlaxoSmithKline Consumer Healthcare Ltd"
PRODUCT:"Women’s Horlicks"

COMPLAINT:

"The ad shows cheese, milk and other sources of calcium available to a woman. But cautions that these are all inadequate. If u take WH, with its artificial content it will tone up your backbone! What is unsaid is: if you dont adhere, beware, that is the implicit message. What does Horlicks comprise of? Whatever we consume during our existence, is offered in a hi-tec manner adding artificial (or pharma grade) ingredients to pick u up. Does it constitute an essential food items for your subsistence? Look at the scare mongering - that is, all our traditional food items are a total waste. It takes an Abbott Labs from Thailand debunk our food habits and make Indian a bongo-bongo grass eating adivasis? It is the implicit/explicit message that irks me and is amounting to scare mongering."

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"Violation under The Drugs and Magic Remedies (Objectionable Advertisements) Act, 1955"

Recommendation: NOT UPHELD

"The advertiser representatives were given personal hearing by ASCI. The CCC viewed the TVC and considered the Advertiser’s response. As claim support data, the Advertiser provided various scientific journal references, and label copy of the product. The CCC noted that the references submitted by the advertiser state that adequate calcium intake along with vitamin D is necessary to maintain the peak bone mass achieved by an individual. Advertiser states that the TVC suggests to complement the regular diet with Women's Horlicks, containing Calseal formula which is a coined creative term used to denote the key nutrients i.e. Vitamin D, Vitamin K2 and Calcium. In the context of the TVC highlighting the role of Vitamin D in the product in making Calcium from regular food being bioavailable, the CCC concluded that the claim, “Women‘s Horlicks jiska specialised Calseal formula Calcium ko bones tak puchane mein madad kare”, was not objectionable. The complaint was NOT UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Jewel Souk Online Jewellery Marketplace Ltd"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"1. Diamond pe Diamond free. 2. Flat 50 percent off on diamond Jewellery plus assured diamond jewel free. 3. Jewelsouk.com is world’s largest Jewellery marketplace."

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"1. The advertiser means that they are giving real diamond jewellery free at 50 percent off discount. If no then why it is not mentioned. The non-disclosure misleads consumers. 2. Is it available on all products of all brands? If no then why it is not mentioned. The non-disclosure misleads consumers. 3. Is there a minimum purchase price for getting this offer? If yes then why is it not mentioned? The non-disclosure misleads consumers. 4. What is the duration of this offer? 5. Claims 1 - 3 needs to be substantiated. Action to be taken- We propose that the advertisement should be immediately withdrawn."

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. 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 for this complaint. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims, “Diamond pe Diamond free”, and “Flat 50% off on diamond Jewellery plus assured diamond jewel free”, were not substantiated with details of the offer, the terms and conditions applicable, duration of the offer, evidence of the customers who have availed the said offer, etc. The claim, “Jewelsouk.com is world’s largest Jewellery marketplace”, was not substantiated with comparative data versus other similar competitor Jewellers in the same category or any third party validation or research to prove this claim. Also, the claims are misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Narayana Hrudayalaya Ltd"
PRODUCT: "Narayana Multispecialty Hospital"

COMPLAINT:

“The only reliable option in treatment of Joints related Problem.”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"Appeared in DNA Ahmedabad News Paper - 31 August 2016 Claims - 1. The only reliable option in treatment of Joints related Problem. Our Objections - The claim needs to be substantiated with data from independent reports. How does Narayana Hospital claim that it is the only reliable option in the treatment of joints related problems. According to us the advertisement contravenes Chapter 1.1 and 1.4 of ASCI code. Action to be taken- We propose that the advertisement should be immediately withdrawn."

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. 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 for this complaint. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “The only reliable option in treatment of Joints related Problem.”, was not substantiated with clinical evidence comparing with other possible options, and is misleading by gross exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Bajaj Corp Ltd "
PRODUCT: "Bajaj Almonds Drops Hair Oil"

COMPLAINT:

"“Bajaj Almond drops se Almond ka nourishment paayen”, “Bajaj Almond Drop me hai sadharn nariyal tel ke mukaable 300% extra vitamin E”, “Baal bane rahen Strong bajaj almond drops se” A blue bottle initially was projected going towards hair and then is thrown down by a stroke of Advertiser Product. Font size of disclaimer is not in compliance to ASCI guidelines."

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"1. Advertiser Product is type 3 hair oil with almost 80% mineral oil, minimal quantity of almond oil and their product is ridiculing pure oil and alluring consumers to change to liquid paraffin based oil. 2. A mere comparison with one vitamin content, and denigrating coconut oil as a whole is itself unfair. 3. The impression which is sought to be given in the advertisement is that Vitamin E is the only ingredient/element which adds to the nutritional value of the hair oil. It is noteworthy that coconut oil, is well known and established through scientific literature to confer numerous benefits to hair, including 1). penetrating hair follicle and shaft to the cortex level, 2). increasing hair strength, 3). reducing hair fall, 4). preventing damage due to grooming. 4. Advertiser`s claims are propagating that their product is better than coconut oil, we submit that advertiser product is not even close to the benefits given by coconut oil. 5. Pure Coconut oil sold in India does not contain analysable quantity of vitamin E and also Coconut Oil is not known to be source of Vitamin E in the literature. We are submitting a report by Institute of Chemical Technology which concludes that there is no vitamin E content in commercially available coconut oil, same is marked as Annexure A. An external lab report also concluded that Vitamin E in some of the most popular brands of coconut edible oil in India (Parachute, Cocopure, Cocoraj & Cococare) was absent, the same is attached and marked as Annexure B. It is important to note here that the analytical method used here is LCMS, the most sensitive method available for any analytical testing. The detection limit is 0.1 ppm. Inspite of this low limit of detection, no Vitamin E was detected in any of the samples which clearly shows that Vitamin E is absent in coconut oil. 6. ASCI has decided in a complaint that:- “….Mere presence of trace levels of Vitamin E which could be a carryover from any of the ingredients but not part of the formulation by design cannot be considered as a fair comparison. The choice of this comparison confers an artificial advantage upon the advertiser and there is likelihood of consumer being misled about the product with which the advertised product is being compared….” We submit that there is no pure coconut oil in Indian market which contains vitamin E by design. Copy of the order is attached as Annexure C. 7. PARACHUTE ADVANSED Hair Oil sold in a blue bottle by Complainant contains more Vitamin E than the Advertiser’s product. If it is in fact coconut hair oil being sold in a blue bottle with which a comparison is being made, the claim of 300% more Vitamin E is factually incorrect. Copy of report establishing the same is annexed for your perusal and marked as Annexure D. 8. Advertisers are ridiculing the entire category of coconut oil sold in blue bottle by making a malicious comparison with an intention to injure the reputation of these products. 9. A comparison between Bajaj Almond and pure Coconut Oil is not a like-to-like comparison and that by itself clearly establishes the unfairness of the comparison. It is a fact that Coconut Oil does not contain analysable quantity of vitamin E and mere presence of trace level of any vitamin which is not part of formulation by design cannot be considered as fair comparison. Subject matter of comparison is chosen in such a way as to confer an artificial advantage upon the advertiser. 10. “Bajaj Almond drops se Almond ka nourishment paayen” is completely a false claim as the content of almond oil is so less in the advertised product that it cannot give almond`s nourishment. 11. “Baal bane rahen strong bajaj almond drops se” there is no substantiation provided by the advertiser for this claim. Advertiser is misleading consumers by advertising that the impugned product will give strong hair with their Product, this is against the consumers interest and this claim is factually incorrect. 12. Disclaimers given by the advertiser in advertisement are not in compliance to ASCI guidelines.”"

Recommendation: UPHELD

"On receiving the FTCC’s recommendation, the advertiser responded with a request for a review of the FTCC recommendation. Advertiser confirmed that the said TVC has been suspended pending review recommendation. As claim support data for Review, the advertiser provided an independent laboratory report on the product’s fatty acid comparison, nourishment properties of the product, tensile strength report, some published / online literature and analysis report on Vitamin E comparison. 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 Technical expert presented at the meeting. The CCC noted that the advertiser did not declare the content of the almond oil in the product and the extent of “almond oil” present in the product was not revealed by the test. The data presented by the advertiser was of a control sample consisting of 22% almond oil with 78% un-named base oil. In the test, a certain similarity of three components was shown; this was implied to be a conclusive evidence of presence of almond oil. However, the CCC did not consider this data to be acceptable to support presence of almond oil as is implied by the visual of almonds in the advertisement. The CCC concluded that the claims, “get the nourishment of almonds” and “it has goodness of almonds”; along with visuals showing almonds, without having undisputedly proven the presence of real almond oil in the product in a reasonable quantity was misleading by ambiguity and implication. The TVC contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of ASCI Code. The CCC recommendation that this complaint being Upheld stands on Review. As regards Vitamin E content, the CCC noted that two test reports of Vitamin E content have been submitted, one by the complainant submitted earlier, and the other by the advertiser for review. These two reports are totally contradictory: one shows the presence of Vitamin E and the other does not. In view of these contradictory reports showing superiority of their respective products, the CCC recommended that a new study could be conducted as per mutually agreeable test protocol at an independent laboratory where the study costs can be shared by both the companies to avoid bias. Till such time, the complaint being Upheld stands on Review."

 

COMPANY:"Go Airlines (India) Ltd"
PRODUCT:"Go Valentine contest"

COMPLAINT:

“They promised air tickets to the winners. They gave only rs 500, instead of the promised air ticket”

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 for this complaint. The CCC viewed the twitter advertisement and the supporting evidence provided by the complainant. The CCC noted that the twitter advertisement states, “Tell us which GoAir destination u want to fly to, with ur valentine. 3 lucky winners can win tickets to that destination”, and the SMS received by the Complainant states, “Congrats on winning the #GoValentine Contest. Avail Rs.500 off on your next booking with GoAir”. This appears to be contradictory to the claim made in the Twitter advertisement. The Advertiser did not provide any details regarding the modality of the contest (details of the contest, process followed, details of winners etc.) The CCC noted that the advertisement is misrepresentation of facts, and is misleading by omission of the date of execution, date of announcements of winners of the contest, and that it is subject to terms and conditions. The advertiser has not stated clearly all material conditions so as to enable the consumer to obtain a true and fair view of their prospects in such activities. The CCC concluded that the Twitter advertisement contravened Chapters I.1, I.4 and I.5(f) of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Flipkart Internet Private Limited"
PRODUCT:"Flipkart – Sale of Titan Sonata digital Watch"

COMPLAINT:

“I state that, during the sale, it was declared by Flipkart on its portal that the above Titan Sonata digital Watch MRP is Rs 599/-. As promotion Flipkart was offering 20% discount on MRP and post 20% discount the price payable is Rs. 479/- and adding delivery/ shipping charges Rs. 30 total payable sum of Rs. 509/-. On the total payable Rs. 509/- a special discount of 10% cash back of SBI cards was applied and final payable amount collected was Rs. 458. The said watch, Titan Sonata digital Watch was delivered to me on Sunday 7th August 2016. In the invoice it is categorically mentioned that Rs. 458/- as total payable amount of the said watch. 10. To my shock and surprise when I opened the box of the watch, the MRP of the box of the said watch was tagged as ONLY Rs. 399/-. Further the price tag attached to the said watch is also clearly mention the MRP ONLY as Rs. 399/- . A photographs of the MRP declaration on the watch box and price tag of the manufacturer Titan Company Limited are marked and annexed hereto charging the mrp more than what is the actual the online retailers are selling the products and cheating lots of customers under the pretext of the discount, it was only when the mrp tag is mentioned that we realise that we have been frauded.”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The Advertiser (Flipkart Internet P. Ltd) as well as the product seller were approached by ASCI for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. Both were offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser nor the seller representatives sought a personal hearing and Flipkart submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the website advertisement and considered Flipkart’s response. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the Seller prior to the due date for this complaint. Flipkart states that it is the Seller who offered the product price and the discount on the said offered price and not Flipkart and that the listing of the product by a seller should not be construed as an advertisement. As per the CCC, ASCI code's definition of Advertising states that ""Any communication which in the normal course would be recognised as an advertisement by the general public would be included in this definition even if it is carried free-of-charge for any reason."" Therefore promotion via Website too is considered as Advertising and in ASCI’s purview. As per Flipkart, the sellers are allowed to list their products and describe the product details including image of the product for the convenience of the buyer visiting the platform. The CCC noted that the consumer has seen the product advertisement offering discount on the Flipkart website and the transaction for purchase also has taken place between the consumer and Flipkart. In the absence of comments from the Seller, the CCC concluded that the website communication claiming the MRP of the product as Rs.599 was false. The advertisement offering a the discounted price of Rs.479, when the actual MRP of the product is Rs.399, distorts facts and is therefore misleading the consumers as to actual discount being offered. The Website communication contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Zee Entertainment Enterprises Ltd"
PRODUCT:"Z ETC Channel"

COMPLAINT:

“The Z ETC cable channel claims that it has beaten its competitor, Bindass Play in the BARC television ratings. The period of comparison is too short. The source of data indicated in the advertisement is Week 36, 2016. The BARC rules on Fair Usage require any comparison to cover a minimum period of 4 consecutive weeks. The advertisement makes a false claim and thus violates Chapters 1 and 4 of the ASCI Code.”

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. Advertiser states that the channel had highlighted viewership, which was high in the 36th week and hence the period for the advertisement was taken for Week 36’2016. The claim support data was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC viewed the website advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response as well as opinion of the Technical expert presented at the meeting. The CCC noted that the BARC data shows that Z ETC was ahead of Bindass Play for a brief period of 2 weeks (36-37). The trend before and after this period was that Bindass Play was consistently ahead of Z ETC. Though Z ETC has not expressly claimed leadership as defined by BARC guidelines on fair and permissible usage, the advertisement in question appears to suggest leadership and the selective use of data is not clearly explained to the readers. The CCC concluded that the claim, “They Just Got Played – ZETC beats Bindass Play”, was not substantiated and is misleading. While the Advertiser has referred to BARC data as a source for their claim, the CCC noted that as per “BARC India Ratings – Principles of Fair and Permissible Usage” the period of comparison for any claim of leadership should cover at least four consecutive weeks of data. However, as per the disclaimer put by the advertiser for the claim is based on single week (week 36’16) and not four consecutive weeks of data as per BARC. Therefore it is violative of BARC Principles. The subject matter of comparison is chosen in such a way so as to confer an artificial advantage upon the advertiser so as to suggest that a better bargain is offered than is truly the case. The website advertisement contravened Chapters I.1, I.3, I.4 and IV.1(b) of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Socomo Technologies P. Ltd"
PRODUCT:"Jugnoo"

COMPLAINT:

“Take 3 Rides get 4th Free”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

“The card said "First Ride Free". There was very small "T&C apply" at the bottom. Emails said "Take 3 Rides Get 4th Free". Here at the end of email Terms and Conditions are there "Maximum value of the coupon is 50. Auto driver asked me to install their app giving me the card. Even the T&C was not mentioned, making it ambiguous. I found out later T&C was "upto Rs 30", when my fare was around 200. But that clearly isn't a free first ride when I paid around 170. I emailed them about the false advertisement. They just say "sorry, we assure you have no complain next time". Then I received T&C types emails several times from them. How can the 4th ride be free? They should better call it discounted.”

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the Ad – promotional material and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser states that the referral programs are promotional discounts which are decided based on the median ride fares. Therefore, a maximum amount user can redeem under any promotion is INR.50 (fifty) as that is the ride fare of more than 50% of the rides on an average day. The CCC noted that the terms and conditions of the offer mention that the maximum value of the coupon is Rs. 50. The CCC concluded that the claim offer, “Take 3 Rides get 4th Free”, is misleading as the 4th ride is not free but is subject to terms and conditions that the cashback being offered is limited to Rs.50/-. The advertisement – promotional material contravened Chapter I.4 of the Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Vodafone India Ltd"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“Get the all new iphone7 before the world!”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"Vodafone are claiming that you'll 'get the iPhone 7 before the world'. https://twitter.com/VodafoneIN/status/781812964470951936 This is an outright lie. The iPhone 7 has already released in several countries. It would be utterly impossible for anyone to get it 'before the world' two weeks after release."

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 for this complaint. The CCC viewed the twitter advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “Get the all new iphone7 before the world!”, is false and is misleading by exaggeration. The twitter advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Vodafone India Ltd"
PRODUCT:"Vodafone Internet"

COMPLAINT:

“Now 1=10! Get 9GB free with a 1GB pack, when you buy a new 4G phone”, “200 million customers celebration.”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"Our Objections – 1. The claim needs to be substantiated with data from independent reports. 2. Will the offer be valid for any 4G phone or limited to only those purchased from Vodafone. 3. Are the 200 million customer of Vodafone India. According to us the advertisement contravenes Chapter 1.1 and 1.4 of ASCI Code. Action to be taken - we propose that the advertisement should be immediately withdrawn.”"

Recommendation: NOT UPHELD

"The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser states that the offer is available for any person only with a new 4G phone and not any Vodafone 4G phone. On purchasing a new 4G phone and paying for a pack of 1GB 4G data, the customer gets additional 9 GB 4G data at no extra cost. The CCC concluded that the claim offer, “Now 1=10! Get 9GB free with a 1GB pack, when you buy a new 4G phone”, is not misleading as the offer is available only on any new 4G phone. As claim support data for claiming “200 million customers celebration”, the advertiser provided independent certification by Telecom Watch, which stated that for August 2016 Vodafone’s subscriber base reported was over 200 million as per COAI published report. The CCC concluded that this claim was substantiated. The complaint was NOT UPHELD."

 

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

COMPLAINT:

“Airtel is advertising that with rs 29 internet recharge it's enough for one month. But it offers only 75 mb which can be consumes in 3g by just in minutes. It is misguiding people kindly look in to the matter.”

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 (Telugu version) provided by the complainant and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser provided a Hindi language version of the same advertisement under complaint. Advertiser states that the recharge of Rs.29 advertised as “Mahiney bhar ka internet” is only with respect to the validity of the sachet pack priced at Rs.29. The Supers in the advertisement informs the customers that 75 MB of data is offered on a recharge of Rs.29 with validity of 30 days. The CCC noted that the advertisement visual depicts tabs for Facebook and YouTube implying that data may be used for these Apps and for the Facebook and YouTube applications 75 MB is not likely to last for a month. The claim (in Hindi), “Rs.29 Mahiney bhar ka internet” (Rs.29 Internet for full month) is misleading by ambiguity and implication. The advertisement contravened Chapter I.4 of the Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Chandravansi Group Organization of Institution"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“100% Placement Assistance”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the TVC. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the use of “100%” numerical claim is not relevant for “placement assistance” claim. The claim is misleading by implication. The TVC contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapter I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY:"SRSM Defence Academy"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“With 100% Guarantee of Selection or else get your fees back”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and in the absence of comments from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim (in Hindi) as translated in English, “With 100% Guarantee of Selection or else get your fees back”, was not substantiated with authentic supporting data such as detailed list of students who have been placed through their Institute, contact details of students for verification, enrolment forms and appointment letters received by the students. Also, the advertiser did not provide evidence to prove that the fees have been refunded to those who have not been selected for jobs. The claim is misleading by ambiguity and 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:"Sahar Herbal Pharmacy Pvt. Ltd"
PRODUCT:

"Rasayan Kalp Powder"

COMPLAINT:

"Complete Benefit in 3 days The claims in the advertisement & the Visual on the Advertisement is in Violation of The Drugs and Magic Remedies (Objectionable Advertisements) Act, 1955."

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the concerned Media (Hindustan Media Ventures Ltd) for their assistance in providing the contact details of the advertiser, or to forward the complaint to the advertiser. The CCC noted that no response was received from the advertiser or from the concerned media prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the print advertisement. In the absence of response from the concerned media and comments from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim (in Hindi) as translated in English, “Complete Benefit in 3 days”, was not substantiated with clinical evidence of product efficacy and is misleading. Also, specific to the claims related to remedy for sexual diseases 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:"Vanesa Care Pvt Ltd"
PRODUCT:"Denver Xtreme Performance Active Deodorant"

COMPLAINT:

“2X Sweat Defence.”

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. Advertiser states that there is a greater perfume concentration in their product as compared to standard deodorants to increase the strength of its deodorizing ability, and their product is more effective than deodorant / perfume by virtue of presence of more than 1% Triethylcitrate. In the absence of claim support data, the advertiser was further requested to provide data on Comparative perfume level and Sweat reduction study. Advertiser did not provide this information. The CCC viewed the TVC and considered the Advertiser’s response. The CCC noted that the advertiser has provided a theoretical rationale for their product efficacy. While the TVC indicates the product to be 2X better in sweat defense than standard deodorants, the advertiser has not provided comparative tests/trials data versus other marketed deodorant products to prove this product performance. There being no evidence to show that Denver Xtreme deodorant is twice as effective in double antiperspirant / sweat control as compared to other competitive products in the same category, the CCC concluded that the claim of “2X Sweat Defence”, was inadequately substantiated and is misleading by ambiguity and exaggeration. The TVC contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Sripali’s"
PRODUCT:"Sripali’s Super Kesh Care Oil"

COMPLAINT:

“To give 100 percent result in just 1 pack”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the TVC. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim (in Bengali) as translated in English, “To give 100 percent result in just 1 pack” was not substantiated with product efficacy data and is misleading by exaggeration. The TVC contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"OPTM Health Care Private Ltd"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“Certified by European Medical Association.”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the TVC. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “Certified by European Medical Association (EMA)”, was not substantiated with supporting evidence such as EMA certification supporting the claim as it appears in the TVC, and is misleading. The TVC contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. This complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Herbal Strategi"
PRODUCT: "Herbal Repellents – Range of Products"

COMPLAINT:

“Prevent dengue by spraying certified herbal repellent.”

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. Advertiser states that they have termed the product as certified as they have a drug license to manufacture this product under Ayurveda license. As claim support data, the advertiser provided efficacy test reports, copy of drug license of their four repellent products, among other product related documents. 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 the opinion of Technical expert presented at the meeting. The CCC noted that the CIMAP institute certificate submitted showed that 36% of mosquitoes get repelled in the first 30 minutes, and more later. In general, the product works by repelling and not killing mosquitoes. In terms of efficacy, the data presented shows that the natural herbal oil in the two products tested (room spray and vaporizer) is effective in repelling mosquitoes and is also effective in reducing their propensity to land (and presumably bite) human skin. No efficacy data was presented for the body spray and stick product. The CCC noted that the product merely reduces mosquito bites by repellant action and reduction in mosquito landing on skin does not imply prevention of dengue. The CCC concluded that the claim, “Prevent dengue by spraying certified herbal repellent”, was inadequately substantiated. While the advertiser has provided certificates by laboratories, the reference to “certification” in the context of “prevention of dengue” is misleading by ambiguity and implication. The TVC contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. This complaint was UPHELD." "

 

COMPANY:"Hindustan Unilever Ltd"
PRODUCT:"Lifebuoy Active Silver Soap"

COMPLAINT:

"The brand claims that bathing with their lifeboy silver soap you get coating of active silver on your body this no bacteria can harm you. I need proof of the same that their soap will make active silver coating on my skin and no bacteria can harm me. Similar complaints received post CCC Recommendation Complaint No. 2 (From CERC) “Description of the TVC- The TVC features Bollywoodactor-couple Kajol and Ajay Devgn. The mother playedby Kajol asks her son to bathe with Lifebuoy soap.Ajay, the father, says not Lifebuoy but take a bath withsilver. Kajol looks puzzled and ask- What is theconnection between bathing and silver. Ajay asks hertwo questions in turn. Why do we feed babies using asilver spoon. Why do we cover laddus with silver foil He goes on to answer the questions himself by explaining that silver is Our strongest protection against germs. Claims made- 1) Lifebuoy contains activ silver 2) Silver is our strongest protection against germs Our objections What is Activ Silver. Does this mean that Lifebuoy soap contains silver. What is the amount of silver in one bar of soap. How does silver protect us from germs. Can the company substantiate claims 1 and 2 giving reports from independent agencies. Feeding babies from a silver spoon is a traditional practice. It may have nothing to do with germ protection. Linking the two is misleading. It is ironic that Ajay Devgn refers to the covering of laddus with silver foil. Recently, the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India FSSAI banned silver foil with animal parts. Silver foil is made mostly manually by pressing the silver between layers of animal intestine obtained from slaughterhouses. How then can silver foil be considered free from germs.” Complaint No.3 (from consumer) “I enclose herewith an Ad of New Lifebuoy, a bath soap published in Divya Bhaskar, Vadodara, dt. 27/08/2016. My objections are as follows: 1) The Ad of New Lifebuoy declares with the power of active silver and shows some form like as silver in active form. The soap is for bath and kill harmful germs bacteria causing several diseases. New lifebuoy Ad says - Total 10 kinds of germs bacteria causing infections. This is cheating the consumer with false and wrong information and withholding the real and important fact keeping the consumer in confusion. 2) New lifebuoy Ad gives Active Silver with pleasant smell as ingredients and tries to show the real effectiveness of silver as it is natures best weapon to fight against germs and bacteria, giving an example of silver spoon used by mothers for feeding children and a thin white film on sweets which is thin silver foil, both killing germs bacteria. What is active silver or what does it mean is not a matter of importance for the advertiser. As I understand, Active silver can only exist in-situ in the system and cannot be controlled or passed on to a product to be marketed. A wrong kind of information is passed onto the consumer and he is fooled to believe what is company says. Company must show scientific existence of active silver their product from the market. I think this kind of misinformation to misguide the consumer must be curtailed and advertisers must present the true facts without any ambiguity. Kindly look into the above objections, call for companys reply and then decide on my complaint. Kindly keep me informed.”"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: NOT UPHELD

"On receiving the CCC’s recommendation, the advertiser responded seeking a Review. The advertiser representatives were given personal hearing by ASCI, at which time they explained the documents submitted for Review. Advertiser states that Lifebuoy soap has ionized silver as an active ingredient as part of a proprietary technology termed Activ Silver, for which patents have been filed by them. This proprietary technology enables the delivery of enhanced anti- microbial efficacy by Lifebuoy, while making silver a stable component in their soaps. As claim support data, the advertiser provided a copy of the filed patents, Efficacy reports of Lifebuoy Total 10 vs. formulation without silver, tests showing efficacy against germs as compared to their earlier Lifebuoy formulation with TCC. 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 CCC noted that the advertiser has submitted the data to support efficacy of Lifebuoy with Activ Silver against indicator organism as compared to formula without Activ Silver. The product also has better efficacy than their earlier formulation with TCC when tested against indicator organisms. The CCC concluded that the claims “Silver provides our strongest protection against germs.” “Lifebuoy with new active silver jo de kitano se hamari takatwar suraksha”, was substantiated. The complaint is Not Upheld on Review."

 

COMPANY: "K. C. Mahindra Education Trust (Nanhi Kali)"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"The advertisement is about the girl child education, wherein a girl aged around 6-7 years cut her hairs by scissor just to look like a boy so that she can also visit the school I have just one small request to make, I, a daughter of close to 2 year old daughter whenever watches this advertisement, closely notices the girl cutting her hairs by scissor, I afraid she doesn't attempt something like this. Hence I kindly request you to modify this advertisement slightly so that no child harms herself/himself by this. I have also written to support@nahi kali.com but they said they have put in a line for warning but I asked you whether a child of close to 2 years can read the line. He/she understands by visualisations only."

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 states that the cutting of the hair by the girl child is symbolic of her dilemma to fit into a society we live in and they have put in Supers to strongly discourage any re-enaction. The CCC noted that the disclaimer in the TVC is not legible. Also, the disclaimer in the TVC is not in the same language as the audio of the TVC (Hindi), and the duration of the supers in the TVC are not for 6 seconds on the screen. The CCC concluded that the TVC contravened Clauses 4(I), 4(II), 4(VII), and 4(X) of ASCI Guidelines for Disclaimers. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Hindustan Unilever Limited"
PRODUCT: "Vim Bar"

COMPLAINT:

"TVC claim – “Best ever”, “Fastest product compared to other products across India” Pack claim – “Removes grease fastest”"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"“We would like to bring to your kind attention that the captioned TVCs claiming New “Best Ever” Vim Bar as the “Fastest product compared to other products across India” is being aired on various television channels across India in many languages including Malayalam since 23rd August 2016. We would like to express our deep distress on the tall, false, frivolous and misleading claims along with the derogatory references being made to our brand viz. “EXO” by the leading Dishwash player of the country. We hereby take following two objections in respect of the TVCs which are illuminated herein below: A) The TVCs categorically depicts our Brand in a denigrating manner in poor light. As you will observe in respect of the TVCs (Annexure “A”) that “Vim”, is a brand in Dish Wash Bar category from Hindustan Unilever Limited (“HUL”) is projecting a round shaped Dish Wash Bar in a red round container in their TVCs in such a manner whereby a round shaped Dish Wash Bar is compared with Vim Dish Wash Bar and is depicted as of having/ bearing inferior and lower quality. The round shaped Dish Wash Bar as projected in TVCs is wholly, substantially and deceptively similar to JLL’s “Exo” product viz. EXO Round Bar in the red round container which is a packaging mark of the EXO Round Bar product (Annexure “C”) (hereinafter in short referred to as “our Brand”). This is devious and deceitful attempt to emulate and denigrate our Brand. This method is deployed with malafide intent to hamper our Brand equity and JLL’s image, reputation, product perseverance, goodwill and above all to gain illicitly with an ulterior motive wrongful object to misguide, mislead and prejudice consumer’s trust and sully our Brand. Please note that: Exo Round Dish Wash Bar is the first-ever round shaped Dish Wash Bar manufactured and launched by JLL in the Indian market in the year 2009. The colour combination of the red container and the green Dish Wash Bar shown in the TVCs is now akin with our Brand. In many markets, if not all, this is the only product available in such a combination (Green Round Bar in a Round Red Container). Other than our Brand, there are no branded round shaped Dish Wash Bars manufactured, sold, dealt with in a substantial manner across the country and within the relevant region in which the TVCs is being aired i.e. Southern India which clearly signifies that HUL is comparing its Vim Bar with our product viz. “EXO” thereby deceptively, falsely, wrongfully publicly showing JLL’s product viz. “EXO” of inferior or that of lower quality than their product viz. “Vim” to its unfair advantage. The depiction of that denigrated product shown in the TVCs with the EXO Round Dish Wash Bar 500g. We would also like to highlight and draw your attention on the claim made by HUL in the TVCs in respect of their product “Vim Dish Wash Bar” of “fastest compared to others products across India from Kashmir to Kanyakumari”. This claim is blatantly false and inaccurate as proved during the laboratory tests conducted internally by JLL. The result of the said test is attached as Annexure “D”. As per the BIS standard tests, it is clear that the VIM Bar is not superior to other branded Bars in the segment in terms of overall parameters i.e. (Tough grease removal efficacy, etc).” Thus HUL claims that their Vim Bar removes grease faster than any other product available in the market. They have also clarified by way of a disclaimer stating that ""As per independent lab test conducted on burnt food stain"". This claim tends to mislead the consumer at large and also prejudicially adversely impacts our products in a big way since there is a superlative comparison claimed by them. Such a claim is blatantly false and inaccurate as proved during the laboratory tests conducted internally by our company as well as tests conducted by an external government recognized FDA approved laboratory. These results are as mentioned in Annexure 'E' as attached herewith. (Please also note that the burnt food stains tests as mentioned in the Principal Display Panel (POP) is assumed to be the same test that is mentioned in the BIS standards. However, if the same is outside the BIS Standard (Annexure ""G' - as attached herewith) - the acceptable norm by all stakeholders in the industry, then we put them to the strict proof thereof) As per the BIS standard tests, when it comes to the tough grease removal, it is clear that the VIM Bar is not superior to other branded Bars in the segment. Hence such a claim on the pack cannot be permitted to be carried on. b) Blatant attempt to confuse consumers: voice over claims comparison with ""Sadharan"" bar while visually depicting Exo Bar in a round tub, which is a premium product. You will observe that in respect of the TVCs that ""Vim"" Vim Bar has released, while they project the round shaped green colour Dish Wash Bar in a red round container in the said TVCs, they mention this bar as a 'sadharan' which means an Ordinary bar thereby comparing our product with that of theirs and claiming our product to be ordinary there by meaning sub standard or inferior. We would like to draw your attention that whereas our EXO brand round shape Dishwash Bar is available at 10 paise per gram (Rs, 25/- for 250 g) or at best 9 paise per gm (Rs. 45/- per 500 g), the Vim Bar is available at close to 7 paise per gram (Rs. 5/- for 70 g and Rs. 10/- for 125 g). This signifies that our Round shaped EXO bar is available in the market at cost per gram higher than the VIM Bar that is depicted in the TVC. The round segment represents about 15 of the market. The bulk of the market lies in plain rectangular bars priced at Rs 5/- and Rs 10/- per piece respectively. We see this as a devious attempt by a competitor to make a visual reference to us while trying to pass it off as an ordinary bar in a very shrewd and patently false manner. i) External test reports for various Bars attached herein and named as Annexure ""E"". ii) Photographs of the Front and back of pack of the VIM bar is attached herein and named as Annexure “F1 to F4"". iii) BIS test Standards attached herein and named as Annexure ""G""."

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The advertiser representatives were given personal hearing by ASCI. Advertiser states that a round tub design is not the registered design of the Complainant and is being used extensively by numerous brands across India for Dish wash bars, including with red colour in their trade dress. Comprehensive tests were conducted to determine the time taken to remove the greasy identified toughest stains, by the New Vim as compared to available competition products. As claim support data, the advertiser provided images of few brands with round tub design, test protocols and reports, etc. The claim support data was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC viewed the TVC, product packaging and considered the Advertiser’s response as well as the opinion of Technical expert presented at the meeting. The CCC noted that comparative tests have been done with a large number of dish wash bars including complainant’s product EXO. The claim support data shows that Vim is faster than EXO for removal of burnt food stains and mildly faster for coffee/tea stain removal and on par with all other types of grease/dirt, whereas EXO is at best on par or inferior in de-greasing speed comparison. In absence of any data to prove that Exo performs better than Vim, the CCC concluded that the TVC claim, “There is nothing else faster than Vim”, was substantiated. This complaint was NOT UPHELD. The CCC noted that the visual of the “ordinary” bar in the TVC being aired in South India, where Exo enjoys a significant market share and where it is unique in terms of product presentation (a green round bar in round red container), implies Exo Bar. Also the voice over makes a reference of ""Sadharan"" bar (ordinary bar), implying that it is ordinary or inferior. There being no other criteria for calling out a product as “ordinary”, the CCC considered the TVC to be misleading by ambiguity and implication and unfairly denigrated Exo dish wash bar. The TVC contravened Chapters I.4 and IV.1(e) of the ASCI Code. This complaint was UPHELD. The CCC observed that while the TVC makes a top parity claim, the pack claim, “Vim removes grease fastest*” makes a product superiority claim. There was a mismatch between the claim and its corresponding disclaimer (i.e. “As per independent lab test conducted on burnt food stain”) as the claim refers to “grease” whereas disclaimer and the pack visual appears to show kadhai with burnt food stain being cleaned. The CCC concluded that the claim read in conjunction with the disclaimer and the pack visual is misleading by ambiguity and implication, and the claim of superiority has not been conclusively proven. The CCC noted that the burnt food stain is being represented as the most relevant kind of grease. However, grease (as in an oil stain) by composition and physical properties of stickiness is different from that of burnt food. In view of these discrepancies, the CCC concluded that the pack claim, “Vim removes grease fastest*” contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. This complaint was UPHELD."

 

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

COMPLAINT:

"Complaint No.1: This is completely offensive. Can you take action on them? Complaint No.2 Inciting Religious Violence, Provocative and Hurting religious sentiments. We the Hindu in Dashera Festival, we worship Goddesses, keep fasting , respecting Womanhood and celebrating the Victory of Lord Rama cannot accept mockery of any religion in any way. The same complaint is being posted to PMO office for strict action against such adds and advertising media and companies who indulge in such activities. Request you to kindly take strict action please."

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: NOT UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response counter questioning as to what the complainant find offensive in the advertisement. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. The CCC concluded that the advertisement visual with the headline, “whenever you think Daandiya think Stay-On”, “perform like a man possessed with uncontrolled vigour, vitality and energy And say thank you Stay-On” is sexually suggestive. However, is not likely to cause grave and widespread offence. This complaint was NOT UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Abbott Healthcare P. Ltd"
PRODUCT:"Pediasure"

COMPLAINT:

"“Iske 37 Nutrients de sampoorn poshanjo bachhon ko 1.5Xteji se badhne mein madadd karein"" Pediasure is the ""#1 Pediatrician Prescribed Brand"""

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"“1. Non-compliance 1: The product ""Pediasure"" provides ""complete nutrition / sampoorn poshan"" is being depicted an answer to daily balanced diet. The voice ""Bacchon ki adhure growth ka karan ho sakta hai unke theek se na khanna - isi liye Pediasure. Iske 37 Nutrients de sampoorn poshanjo bachhon ko 1.5Xteji se badhne mein madadd karein"". This clearly misleads the consumer into believing that Pediasure is a substitute to a balanced diet and that it has 37 nutrients that in isolation fulfill ""ALL"" the nutritional needs of a child. This is a grossly misleading statement. The reference to the study Green R.J. et al ., How to Improve Eating Behaviour During Early Childhood Pediatr Gastroenterol Hepatol Nutr; 2015 March 18 (1); 1-9 (hereinafter referred to as ""Study I"") nowhere concludes that Pediasure is the answer to complete nutritional needs of a child. Study 1 talks about nutritional deficiencies due to picky eaters/eating behavior disorder among children during early childhood. Study 1 does not talk about ""Pediasure"" as solution to such a problem. Study 1 is attached and marked Annexure B. As such, the claim that ""Pediasure provides complete nutrition"" is unsubstantiated and is a gross violation of Section 24 of the Food Safety and Standards Act., 2006 and Regulation 2.5 of the Food Safety and Standards (Packaging and Labelling) Regulations, 2011. The claims are also a violation of the guidelines laid down in the ASCI Code. 2. Non-compliance 2: Reference to clinical study to substantiate the claim of""1.5X Growth"" not relevant in Indian context Objections to the clinical study ""Effect of Oral Supplementation on Catch-Up Growth in Picky Eaters - published in Clin Pediatr (Phila) 2003; 42; 209 authored by Alarcon et al Pediasure's claim of ""1.5X growth"" is based on two clinical studies the first one being -""Effect of Oral Supplementation on Catch-Up Growth in Picky Eaters - published in Clin Pediatr (Phila) 2003; 42; 209 authored by Alarcon et al"" (hereinafter referred to as ""Study 2"") - which tested the product on 103 children from Philippines and Taiwan in the age group of 3 to 5 years of age. The children were divided into 2 groups --'control and study - and underwent a feeding trial for 2 months. The study observed impact at intervals of 0, 30, 60 and 90 days. The study was published in the Journal-""Clinical Pediatrics, 2003"" is attached herewith and marked ""Annexure C."" The study has recorded a height increase of2.66 ± 1.45 cm from baseline after 90 days of supplementation which has been interpreted in the TVC and label as 1.5 times increase in height of the child. The key objections to Study 2 are: a. The study was not conducted on Indian children-and is therefore not relevant in the Indian context as the dietary habits of children from India is different from that of children from Phillipines and Taiwan. b. The study subjects had faltered growth at baseline (in Table 1 ofthe Study 2 at page 212, weight v. age percentile of study group is significantly higher than the study group), so a supplement is bound to improve their nutritional status when given in addition to their regular diet over a 90-day period. WHO and Codex recommend that a children of ideal weight and height should be made subject of the study. c. The children were studied over a 90-day period which is not ideal for interpreting growth increments and growth velocity and is therefore not a fool proof time period for a study, the results of which can be relied on. The ideal time period for the study as per ICMR should be, a minimum of 6 months. a. Objections to the clinical study ""Malaysian Journal of Nutrition; Vol 21, Suppl. Jan 2015; Page S81 (Among children with upper respiratory infection) authored by Shaikh 1. The second study relied on by Pediasure for its claim of""1.5X growth"" is Malaysian Journal of Nutrition; Vol 21, Suppl. Jan 2015; Page S81 (Among children with upper respiratory infection) authored by Shaikh 1 (hereinafter referred to as ""Study 3"") is again not relevant in the Indian context. 3. Non-compliance 3: The TVC claims that Pediasure is the ""#1 Pediatrician Prescribed Brand"" The TVC claims that Pediasure is the ""#1 Pediatrician Prescribed Brand"" and refers to data from (1) CMARC (India) Pvt. Ltd. (MAT Jan - Dee 2014) and (2) Kantar Health research among HCP's in H2 2013. The claim ""#1 Pediatrician Prescribed Brand"" is vague and nowhere has clarity been imparted as far.as the following specifics are concerned: a. Whether # 1 Pediatrician Prescribed Brand in India OR in another country OR globally b. Whether # 1 Pediatrician Prescribed Brand to address growth or infections or immunity c. Whether # 1 Pediatrician Prescribed Brand in the milk food drink category or drugs or some other category for children A blanket statement of it being ""#1 Pediatrician Prescribed Brand"" is misleading. The label claims and the claims on the TVC are also in violation of the proviso to Section 24 of the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 reproduced herein for ready 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 post the due date. Advertiser states that Pediasure with 37 vital nutrients helps provide complete, balanced nutrition for children at nutritional risk to support their growth and development and the same is supported with clinical studies. As claim support data, the advertiser gave references of published studies and also submitted certificates from market research agencies regarding the most prescribed brand claim. 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 CCC noted that the product is being depicted as an answer to daily balanced diet. The claim that Pediasure provides “Complete” nutrition is misleading and exaggerated as the description in the title and body of the study conducted calls it ""oral supplementation"". Nutritional Supplement can be only a supplement and cannot replace Normal Nutrition, whatever it may contain. The CCC concluded that the claim, “Iske 37 Nutrients de “sampoorn poshan” …"", was not substantiated and is misleading by exaggeration. The TVC contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the Code. This complaint was UPHELD. Complaint that the Study being quoted is not relevant as it is not conducted in Indian Children and that the baselines for the study and Control group are different is NOT UPHELD because the CCC opined that International clinical studies are considered acceptable on a case by case basis, depending on the nature, design and extrapolability of the studies. Also, in the study, results for both the study groups have been compared statistically. In absence of support from the complainant that ICMR guidelines mandate a minimum six month period as study duration, the complaint challenging the 90 day study period was NOT UPHELD. However, the CCC observed that the disclaimers in the TVC regarding this important aspect of the clinical study are not clearly legible. Also, the disclaimers in the Hindi TVC are not in the same language as the audio of the TVC. Advertiser states that the claim of “#1 Paediatrician Prescribed Brand"" is based on the reports of two market research agencies CMARC India Pvt Ltd and TNS India. The CCC observed that the TNS data was old (for the period Jan-Jun 2013) and hence was not considered to be acceptable. As per the CMARC report, Pediasure enjoyed more than 51% Rx share in India during the period (MAT Jan-Dec 2015) in dietetics baby food category. However, the TVC did not have a disclaimer to reflect the source of the study and was misleading by ambiguity and omission. The CCC noted that the disclaimers in the TVC are not clearly legible. Also, the disclaimers in the Hindi TVC are not in the same language as the audio of the TVC. The TVC contravened Chapters I.2 and I.4 of the ASCI Code, as well as Clauses 4(I), 4(II), and 4(VII) of ASCI Guidelines for Disclaimers. This complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Ashok & Co. Pan Bahar Ltd"
PRODUCT:"Pan Bahar Masala"

COMPLAINT:

"Complaint No.1 (intra industry complaint) “This is with reference to the advertisement of our client Panparag India Ltd. with artist Sachin Khedekar. Wherein our client received a notice issued by you instructing to withdraw the commercial with immediate effect. The reason for the same was declared that our TVC with artist Sachin Khedekar is inspiring the youth inspite of the truth of Mr.Sachin Khedekar not being so popular in youth. But now a days we have came across the TVC of PAN BAHAR with the very big and influenced celebrity Mr.Pierce Brosnan (James Bond). Please find below the link of the same https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ob1RBsKnLP0 Even the full page print ad was carried yesterday in Times of India Herewith attaching the image for your reference. We have seen the hoarding design too. Also attaching its reference. Just seeking for the justice from your end.Kindly find the attached PDF file of Times of India e-paper Chandigarh & Delhi Edition. The ad appeared on first page on 7th Oct. 2016, Friday loudly displays Pan Bahar Pan Masala (Pan Bahar Crystal & Pan Bahar Heritage) As you said it appears to be Mouth Freshener, let me bring to your notice that they claim it to be ""World's most expensive Pan Masala”. We have also attached the TVC for your reference. “ Complaint No.2 (consumer complaint) “In the new advertisement mr. james bond (Pierce Brosnan) comes out of his car with pan bahar pack in his hand then he fights with the enemies by throwing the pan bahar pack on them. then proudly says 'Class Never Goes Out Of Style'/pehchan kamiyabi ki with pack in his hand according to the law no actor should advertise for pan masala, but pan bahar is advertised by one of the biggest actor in the world Mr. James Bond (Pierce Brosnan)”"

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, hoarding, TVC and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser argues that their products are not meant for the consumption and use by minors, and are not sold to minors nor targeted at them. The CCC noted that the Advertiser did not provide a sample of the product nor a copy of the FSSAI license. The Advertiser has shown the celebrity (Pierce Brosnan) for all their product range of Pan Bahar that includes Pan Masala category (Pan Bahar Crystal & Pan Bahar Heritage) in various advertisements. The Pan masala advertisement has a health warning “Pan Masala is injurious to health”. The CCC concluded that minors are very likely to be exposed to the advertisements in various media such as Print, hoarding and the TVC etc. The celebrity in the advertisement would have a significant influence on minors who are likely to emulate the celebrity in using the product. The advertisements showing the celebrity 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 “Panmasala is injurious to health” in their advertising or packaging.” The CCC also noted that the advertisement for Pan Bahar Crystal & Pan Bahar Heritage is misleading by implication and contravened Chapters I.4 and III.6(b) of the ASCI Code (“Whether there exists in the advertisement under complaint any direct or indirect clues or cues which could suggest to consumers that it is a direct or indirect advertisement for the product whose advertising is restricted or prohibited by law or by this Code.”). Also, the advertisements did not meet the requirements as per ASCI's Guidelines for Qualification of Brand Extension Product or Service and thereby contravened Chapter III.6 (a) of the ASCI Code (“Whether the unrestricted product which is purportedly sought to be promoted through the advertisement under the complaint is produced and distributed in reasonable quantities, having regard to the scale of the advertising in question, the media used and the markets targeted.”). The print advertisement, hoarding and the TVC contravened Chapters I.4, III.2(e), III.6 (a) (b) of the Code. The complaints were UPHELD." "

 
 

 

Complaint to
WhatsApp
DID YOU KNOW?

Developed by Wishtree Technologies LLP