ccc recommendations - august 2018 - ascionline.org recommendations - august 2018.pdfccc...
TRANSCRIPT
CCC Recommendations - August 2018
COMPANY: Nilaai Educational Trust Group of Institutes
Complaint:
“The advertisement is for promotion of their college courses and admission related. The mail ID
of the institute is [email protected]
As per the ASCI Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs no
institution Advertisement shall not state or lead the public to believe that enrollment in the
institution or program or preparation course or coaching classes will provide the student a
temporary or permanent job but the advertisement states that 100% placement which is
misleading the students to take admission the Institute also it is promoting PMKVY which is a
government run program and is clubbing the advertisement with its Education advertisement
which is again misleading the students.”
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the
complainant and forwarded the details of the complaint, verbatim, to the advertiser with a request
to respond to the same. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the
ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser had, however, not responded to ASCI’s request. The CCC noted
that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the prescribed due date for this
complaint. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and upon careful consideration of the
complaint, and in the absence of any comments or response from the advertiser, the CCC
concluded that the claim, “100% 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, and is misleading by exaggeration. The
advertisement is also misleading as it promoting a government run program – PMKVY, along
with their other courses, which is likely to lead to grave or widespread disappointment in the
minds of consumers. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational
Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1, I.4 and I.5 of the ASCI Code. The complaint
was UPHELD
COMPANY: Ashok & Co. – Pan Bahar Ltd.
PRODUCT: Bahar Select Pan Masala
Complaint:
This advertisement is of a Pan Masala and it is attractive lyrics and tune which has rhyme and
attracts children. I have encountered that majority of children of age 6 - 15 years sing along when
add comes and has lyrics "Bheer mne na tum atko" conveying that you should not follow crowd
but should shine apart from them by using this pan masala. Moreover at end the message that pan
masala chewing is injurious to health is played at very fast speed mocking the rule of Govt. for
this message.
1. The advertisement is being played almost every 10 minutes on popular FM channel 92.7
at prime time.
2. Children are listening and getting attracted to pan masala chewing by this frequency and
lyrics of add.
3. The fast speed with which the Waring of pan masala chewing is injurious to health is
played mocks of rules made by Govt. of India for health.
Yes this indeed is the advertisement which is being played on radio too frequently and even
Sundays etc. Kids are singling along this add because of rhyme. It is conveying that to be perfect
you can eat pan masala.
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the
complainant and forwarded the details of the complaint, verbatim, to the advertiser with a request
to respond to the same. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the
ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser had, however, not responded to ASCI’s request. The CCC noted
that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the prescribed due date for this
complaint. The CCC heard the Radio advertisement and observed that towards the end of the
advertisement, the speed of spoken cautionary message “paan masala chabana haanikarak hai”,
and the volume of the audio contravened Clause XI of ASCI Guidelines for Disclaimers
(“……the speed of spoken disclaimers should not exceed 6 syllables per second and its volume
should be at the same level as the rest of the audio”). The complaint was UPHELD.
COMPANY: Udaipur Study Circle
Claim Objected To:
“The only institute of UGC in South Rajasthan which has given highest selections in
IAS/RAS/RPS and Teachers Post”
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in
the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI
Secretariat which they did not avail, but replied through their advocates. The advocate on behalf
of the advertiser replied requesting for an extension of 15-20 days to submit their response. The
advertiser was granted an extension of seven days to the standard lead time of seven days to
submit their reply in response to their request for this extension. However, the Advertiser did
not submit their response by the extended due date. The CCC viewed the print advertisement
and observed that the Advertiser did not provide any support data or evidence of comparison with
other similar institutes to prove they are the only institute in South Rajasthan to give highest
selections for the claimed career courses. In the absence of claim support data, the CCC
concluded that the claim, “The only institute of UGC in South Rajasthan which has given highest
selections in IAS/RAS/RPS and Teachers Post”, was not substantiated, and is misleading by
exaggeration. The claim is likely to lead to grave or widespread disappointment in the minds of
consumers. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational
Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1, I.4 and I.5 of the ASCI Code. The complaint
was UPHELD.
COMPANY: Denajee Health Care Products
Claim Objected To:
“No.1 Satreetha Shampoo”
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in
the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI
Secretariat which they did not avail, but submitted their written response. The advertiser had
stated in their response that the claim made is basis that that Satreetha Shampoo is the highest
selling product than their other healthcare products shown in the advertisement.
Upon carefully viewing the print advertisement, examining the complaint and the response given
by the advertiser, the CCC noted that the claim was not substantiated. The CCC concluded that
the claim, “No.1 Satreetha Shampoo”, is misleading by omission of a qualifier to mention that
the claim is based on the said product being No.1 amongst “their” other own products. The claim
is likely to lead to grave or widespread disappointment in the minds of consumers. The
advertisement contravened Chapters I.1, I.4 and I.5 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was
UPHELD.
COMPANY: Goodlife Wellness Centre
Claims Objected To:
1. Reduce 20 Kg weight till 20 July'18.
2. Get assured result.
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objections raised in the
complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI
Secretariat. The advertiser had, however, not responded to ASCI’s request. The CCC noted that
no response was received from the advertiser prior to the prescribed due date for this complaint.
Advertiser did not provide details of the treatment procedure for weight reduction, nor any weight
loss data based on rigorous trial on statistically significant number of patients. The CCC viewed
the print advertisement and upon careful consideration of the complaint, and in the absence of
any comments or response from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims, “Reduce 20
Kg weight till 20 July'18”, and “Get assured result”, were not substantiated with supporting
clinical evidence, and with treatment efficacy data, and are misleading by exaggeration. The
claims exploit the consumers’ lack of knowledge and are likely to lead to grave or widespread
disappointment in the minds of consumers. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1, I.4 and
I.5 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.
COMPANY: Abbott India Ltd
PRODUCT: Abbott Brufen Active
Claim Objected To:
“Worldwide Trusted”
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the
complainant and forwarded the details of the complaint, verbatim, to the advertiser with a request
to respond to the same. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the
ASCI Secretariat which they did not avail, but submitted their written response. The advertiser
had stated in their response that the brand Brufen was conceptualised to be used with respect to
the drug Ibuprofen in the pain management segment. Brufen is the world's number one Ibuprofen
brand by volume, for which the advertiser quoted the Source: IMS (IQVIA).
Database). Advertiser provided a copy of product approval licence.
Upon carefully viewing the print advertisement, examining the complaint and the response given
by the advertiser, the CCC observed that the product – Brufen Active does not contain ibuprofen
as an active ingredient. The product is Ayurvedic and does not contain ibuprofen. The CCC
considered the reference of “Worldwide trusted” meant for Brufen – an Ibuprofen containing
brand in leadership position, being used for non-Ibuprofen brand Brufen Active false, misleading
by ambiguity and implication. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI
Code. The complaint was UPHELD.
COMPANY: Henna Industries Pvt Ltd
PRODUCT: Color Mate Hair color
Claim Objected To:
“Hibiscus Strengthens your hair and prevents hair loss”
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in
the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI
Secretariat which they did not avail, but submitted their written response through their advocates.
The advocate on behalf of the advertiser had stated in their response that the product contains
Hibiscus flower as an ingredient known as "Gudhal" which helps in hair growth, hair loss and
hair regrowth.
Upon viewing the print advertisement, examining the complaint and the response given by the
advocate, the CCC observed that the advocate’s response has only assertions about the benefits
of Hibiscus flower. However, the advertiser did not provide any details regarding this Product /
product label, and Product composition details. The advertiser did not submit any scientific
rationale regarding the use of Hibiscus, in the advertised Hair colour formulation, and how the
ingredient would provide any claimed benefits in this product format. In the absence of claim
support data, the CCC concluded that the claim, “Hibiscus Strengthens your hair and prevents
hair loss”, is misleading by implication that hibiscus in the hair colour product would strengthen
hair and prevent hair loss. The claim is likely to lead to grave or widespread disappointment in
the minds of consumers. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.4 and I.5 of the ASCI Code.
The complaint was UPHELD.
COMPANY: Diamond Water Park Pvt Ltd
PRODUCT: Diamond Park
Claim Objected To:
“Pune's No.1 Water and Adventure Park”
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in the
complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI
Secretariat. The advertiser had, however, not responded to ASCI’s request. The CCC noted that
no response was received from the advertiser prior to the prescribed due date for this complaint.
The CCC viewed the print advertisement and upon careful consideration of the complaint, and in
the absence of any comments or response from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim,
“Pune's No.1 Water and Adventure Park”, was not substantiated with any verifiable comparative
data of the advertised park and other similar Water and Adventure Parks in Pune, to prove that it
is in leadership position (No.1) than the rest, or through a third party validation. The source for
the claim was not indicated in the advertisement. The claim is misleading by exaggeration and is
likely to lead to grave or widespread disappointment in the minds of consumers. The
advertisement contravened Chapters I.1, I.2, I.4 and I.5 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was
UPHELD.
COMPANY: Diamond Water Park Pvt Ltd
PRODUCT: Diamond Park
Claim Objected To:
“Voted Pune's No.1 Park”
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in the
complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI
Secretariat. The advertiser had, however, not responded to ASCI’s request. The CCC noted that
no response was received from the advertiser prior to the prescribed due date for this complaint.
The CCC viewed the print advertisement and upon careful consideration of the complaint, and in
the absence of any comments or response from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim,
“Voted Pune's No.1 Park”, was not substantiated with any market survey data, or through
verifiable comparative data of the advertised park and other similar Water and Adventure Parks
in Pune, to prove that it is in leadership position (No.1) than the rest, or through a third party
validation. The source for the claim was not indicated in the advertisement. The claim is
misleading by exaggeration and is likely to lead to grave or widespread disappointment in the
minds of consumers. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1, I.2, I.4 and I.5 of the ASCI
Code. The complaint was UPHELD.
COMPANY: Dr. Richa’s Unique Clinic
Claims Objected To:
“International Certified No.1 Clinic”
“Height Treatment - increase height 2-7 cm within 2 months”
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objections raised in the
complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI
Secretariat. The advertiser had, however, not responded to ASCI’s request. The CCC noted that
no response was received from the advertiser prior to the prescribed due date for this complaint.
The CCC viewed the print advertisement and upon careful consideration of the complaint, and in
the absence of any comments or response from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim,
“International Certified No.1 Clinic”, was not substantiated with supporting evidence of the
advertiser’s clinic being internationally certified, and is misleading by exaggeration. Advertiser
did not provide details of the products used for treatment, their composition, treatment procedure
for height increase, nor any treatment efficacy data based on rigorous trial on statistically
significant number of patients. The claim, “Height Treatment - increase height 2-7 cm within 2
months”, was not substantiated with supporting clinical evidence. Specific to the claims implying
treatment for height increase, the advertisement is in Breach of the law as it violated The Drugs
& Magic Remedies Act (Item No.47 under DMR Schedule). The claim is misleading by gross
exaggeration and exploits the consumers’ lack of knowledge and is likely to lead to grave or
widespread disappointment in the minds of consumers. The advertisement contravened Chapters
I.1, I.4, I.5 and III.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.
COMPANY: Dr. Richa’s Unique Clinic
Claim Objected To:
“India's best doctors”
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in the
complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI
Secretariat. The advertiser had, however, not responded to ASCI’s request. The CCC noted that
no response was received from the advertiser prior to the prescribed due date for this complaint.
The CCC viewed the print advertisement and upon careful consideration of the complaint, and in
the absence of any comments or response from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim,
“India’s Best Doctors”, was not substantiated with verifiable comparative data of the advertiser’s
clinic and other similar clinics, to prove that their doctors are better than the rest, or through an
independent third party validation. The claim is misleading by gross exaggeration. The claim is
likely to lead to grave or widespread disappointment in the minds of consumers. The
advertisement contravened Chapters I.1, I.4 and I.5 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was
UPHELD.
COMPANY: Dr.Richa’s Unique Clinic
Claims Objected To:
1. Reduce 1-50 kg weight/ 1-50 inches in difference packages. Assured result-no
side effect, no dieting, no medicine.
2. Convert your body in perfect shape”
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objections raised in the
complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI
Secretariat. The advertiser had, however, not responded to ASCI’s request. The CCC noted that
no response was received from the advertiser prior to the prescribed due date for this complaint.
Advertiser did not provide details of the treatment procedure for weight reduction, nor any weight
loss data based on rigorous trial on statistically significant number of patients. The CCC viewed
the print advertisement and upon careful consideration of the complaint, and in the absence of
any comments or response from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims, “Reduce 1-
50 kg weight/ 1-50 inches in difference packages. Assured result-no side effect, no dieting, no
medicine”, and “Convert your body in perfect shape”, were not substantiated with supporting
clinical evidence, and with treatment efficacy data, and are misleading by exaggeration. The
claims exploit the consumers’ lack of knowledge and are likely to lead to grave or widespread
disappointment in the minds of consumers. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1, I.4 and
I.5 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.
COMPANY: Godrej & Boyce Mfg. Co. Ltd
PRODUCT: Godrej Air Conditioner
Claim Objected To:
“India's Most Heavy-Duty AC Range”
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in
the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI
Secretariat which they did not avail, but submitted their written response. The advertiser had
stated in their response that the term `HeavyDuty’ is a marketing term coined by the brand to
communicate the performance of the product, for which a comparative test was conducted with
two major brands in the AC industry (Daikin and Voltas), to measure the key performance
parameters of Godrej AC. The results indicated that Godrej AC range was better on most of the
parameters of these two significant players in the industry.
As claim support data, the advertiser provided catalogues of Daikin and Voltas, and performance
parameter comparison report. The claim support data was reviewed by the technical expert of
ASCI. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response as well
as the opinion of Technical expert presented at the meeting. The CCC observed that the
comparison test was done against only two products - a market leader and a technical leader. The
basis of comparison was not from any technical test reports but was from the technical
specifications mentioned in catalogues/technical literature of the respective products. The
parameters (Out Door Unit weight and In Door Unit weight with their dimensions, Hurricane
Mode, Hydrophobic Condenser, i-Sense, Grill on outdoor unit) identified for comparison by the
advertiser appeared to be irrelevant for the terminology “heavy duty”. The CCC considered two
possibly admissible parameters namely, Cooling Capacity and Air Throw Cfm, for which the
unit was not superior to the other two. In fact, Voltas was superior on cooling capacity and equal
on air throw. Consumer perception of being heavy-duty like long-lasting, works under extreme
external temperatures/humidity, etc., are not recognized by the advertiser. Based on this data, the
CCC concluded that the claim, “India's Most Heavy-Duty AC Range”, was inadequately
substantiated, and is misleading by exaggeration and implication. The claim is likely to lead to
grave or widespread disappointment in the minds of consumers. The advertisement contravened
Chapters I.1, I.4 and I.5 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.
COMPANY: Fashion Dot Tailoring Technologies
PRODUCT: Hitech Fashions
Claim Objected To:
“India's No.1 Laser Tailoring Company”
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in the
complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI
Secretariat. The advertiser had, however, not responded to ASCI’s request. The CCC noted that
no response was received from the advertiser prior to the prescribed due date for this complaint.
The CCC viewed the print advertisement and upon careful consideration of the complaint, and in
the absence of any comments or response from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim,
“India's No.1 Laser Tailoring Company”, was not substantiated with any verifiable comparative
data of the advertiser’s institute and other tailoring institutes in India to prove that it is in
leadership position (No.1) than the rest in providing courses in tailoring, or through a third party
validation. The source for the claim was not indicated in the advertisement. The claim is
misleading by exaggeration and is likely to lead to grave or widespread disappointment in the
minds of consumers. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1, I.2, I.4 and I.5 of the ASCI
Code. The complaint was UPHELD.
COMPANY: Lotus Herbals Ltd
PRODUCT: Lotus Safe Sun Block SPF 40
Claim Objected To:
“SPF 40”
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in the
complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI
Secretariat. The advertiser had, however, not responded to ASCI’s request. The CCC noted that
no response was received from the advertiser prior to the prescribed due date for this complaint.
The CCC viewed the magazine advertisement and upon careful consideration of the complaint,
and in the absence of any comments or response from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the
advertisement claim and the pack claim in the advertisement, “SPF 40”, was not substantiated
with evidence of the claimed SPF values. The claim is misleading by exaggeration and likely to
lead to grave or widespread disappointment in the minds of consumers. The advertisement
contravened Chapters I.1, I.4 and I.5 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.
COMPANY: Manipal Hospital
Claims Objected To:
“India's most trusted healthcare network”
“India's most trusted hospital network”
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objections raised in
the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI
Secretariat which they did not avail, but submitted their written response. The advertiser had
stated in their response that their Hospital is first in India to be awarded accreditation by the
AAHRPP for ethical standards in clinical research activities, and it is also the most patient
recommended hospital in India by consumer survey. As claim support data, the advertiser
provided a Presentation showing a press article coverage on `Manipal Hospital most patient-
friendly’, and awards and recognitions achieved by the advertiser’s hospital, and consumer data
– Voted by consumers Trusted Hospital 2017 published in Reader’s Digest.
The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the advertiser’s response. The CCC
observed that the data of Reader’s Digest showed that the advertiser’s hospital (Bangalore)
featured in the list of `Top 20 most Trusted Hospitals in India’ in 2017. This data was not
considered relevant for the advertiser’s hospital claiming to be the most trusted hospital or
healthcare `network’ in India. Based on this observation, the CCC concluded that the claims,
“India's most trusted healthcare network” and “India's most trusted hospital network”, were not
substantiated, and are misleading by ambiguity. The claim is likely to lead to grave or widespread
disappointment in the minds of consumers. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1, I.4 and
I.5 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.
COMPANY: Medispa Laser & Cosmetic Surgery Center
Claim Objected To:
“Reliable and trusted by more than 100 doctors for their own hair transplant.”
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in
the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI
Secretariat which they did not avail, but submitted their written response. The advertiser had
stated in their response that the claim made is factual as it is based on the fact that almost 200
Doctors have undergone hair transplants at their centre. As per the advertiser, there is no
requirement to categorize and classify patients under different categories, and hence no third
party can certify this information.
As claim support data, the advertiser provided an excel sheet giving the names of the doctors,
their contact numbers and medical council registration numbers, a copy of certificate for being
registered under Allopathy clinic, and a Presentation showing photographs of ten doctors with
their names, surgery date, and their images of before and after the hair transplant (to be treated
as confidential).
The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the advertiser’s response with the
supporting data. The CCC observed that the data provided of ten doctors was not adequate to
conclusively prove the claim. The Advertiser did not provide evidence in the form of actual
testimonies from doctors who had availed their treatment. The advertiser did not submit any third
party validation of their confidential data. Based on this data, the CCC concluded that the claim,
“Reliable and trusted by more than 100 doctors for their own hair transplant”, was inadequately
substantiated and is misleading by exaggeration and implication. The advertisement contravened
Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.
COMPANY: LG Electronics India Pvt. Ltd
PRODUCT: LG Durables
Claim Objected To:
“India's No.1”
CCC RECOMMENDATION: NOT UPHELD
The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in
the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI
Secretariat which they did not avail, but submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the
print advertisement and considered the
advertiser’s response. The advertiser had stated in their response that the claim is based on the
Market Survey conducted by GFK Nielsen in June 2018, which indicated that LGEIL was No. 1
in the category of Refrigerator in the country. As the data being confidential in nature, the
advertiser refused to share this GFK report. However, they provided a table in their response
quoting the value market share for May and June 2018, as per the GFK report. The CCC observed
that the results showed that LG ranked number 1 with 34.4% (in May) and 35.4% (in June) which
was higher than around 30.4% (May) and 30.5% (June) for the nearest competitor.
In the absence of any data contrary to the above, the CCC concluded that the claim, “India's
No.1”, was substantiated. The complaint was NOT UPHELD.
COMPANY: Kose Corporation India Pvt Ltd
PRODUCT: Spawake Moisture Fresh BB Cream
Claim Objected To:
“SPF 25/PA++”
CCC RECOMMENDATION: NOT UPHELD
The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in
the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI
Secretariat which they did not avail, but submitted their written response. As claim support data,
the advertiser provided manufacturing licence of the product, and copy of test report for SPA and
PA values of the product. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the
advertiser’s response. The CCC observed that the product was tested for sunscreen efficacy.
Based on this report, the CCC concluded that the claim, “SPF 25/PA++” was substantiated with
evidence of the claimed SPF values. The complaint was NOT UPHELD.
COMPANY: Pan India Paryatan Ltd
PRODUCT: Water Kingdom
Claim Objected To:
“Asia's largest theme water park”
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in the
complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI
Secretariat. The advertiser had, however, not responded to ASCI’s request. The CCC noted that
no response was received from the advertiser prior to the prescribed due date for this complaint.
The CCC viewed the print advertisement and upon careful consideration of the complaint, and in
the absence of any comments or response from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim,
“Asia's largest theme water park”, was not substantiated with any verifiable comparative data of
the advertiser’s water park and other similar water parks in Asia, to prove that they are larger
than the rest, or through a third party validation. The claim is misleading by exaggeration. The
claim is likely to lead to grave or widespread disappointment in the minds of consumers. The
advertisement contravened Chapters I.1, I.4 and I.5 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was
UPHELD.
COMPANY: Unique Permanent Hair Loss Cream
Claims Objected To:
1. By applying this cream twice on any parts, any doctors, vaid, hakim or hair expert in the
world will not be able to grow hair again on that part. 2. Get rid of hair permanently through
cream
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI approached the concerned Media (H T Media Ltd) for their assistance in providing the
contact details of the advertiser, or to forward the complaint to the advertiser. The CCC noted
that no response was received from the advertiser or from the concerned media prior to the due
date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the print advertisement. In the absence of response
from the concerned media and comments from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims,
“By applying this cream twice on any parts, any doctors, vaid, hakim or hair expert in the world
will not be able to grow hair again on that part”, and “Get rid of hair permanently through cream”,
accompanied by visuals were not substantiated with product efficacy data, and are misleading by
gross exaggeration. The claims are likely to lead to grave or widespread disappointment in the
minds of consumers. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1, I.4 and I.5 of the ASCI Code.
The complaint was UPHELD.
COMPANY: HNN Institute of Practical Journalism
Claims Objected To:
1. Uttarakhand’s No. 1 and country’s upcoming news channel.
(Source for claim not mentioned.)
2. Guaranteed Job.
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objections raised in the
complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI
Secretariat. The advertiser had, however, not responded to ASCI’s request. The CCC noted that
no response was received from the advertiser prior to the prescribed due date for this complaint.
The CCC viewed the TVC and upon careful consideration of the complaint, and in the absence
of any comments or response from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the voice over claim,
“Uttarakhand’s No. 1 and country’s upcoming news channel”, was not substantiated with
viewership data of the advertiser’s channel against all other competitive channels, to prove that
it is in leadership position (No.1) than the rest, and is misleading by exaggeration and implication.
The source for the claim was not indicated in the TVC.
Voice over claim, “Guaranteed Job” was not substantiated with verifiable supporting data of the
students who were provided with jobs after the completion of their training programs. The claims
are likely to lead to grave or widespread disappointment in the minds of consumers. The TVC
advertisement contravened the Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and
Programs as well as Chapters I.1, I.2, I.4 and I.5 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was
UPHELD.
COMPANY: Cellcom Mobile Training Institute
Claim Objected To:
“Odisha and Bhubaneshwar’s No. 1 mobile training institute”
(Source of claim not mentioned.)
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in the
complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI
Secretariat. The advertiser had, however, not responded to ASCI’s request. The CCC noted that
no response was received from the advertiser prior to the prescribed due date for this complaint.
The CCC viewed the TVC and upon careful consideration of the complaint, and in the absence
of any comments or response from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the voice over claim,
“Odisha and Bhubaneshwar’s No. 1 mobile training institute” was not substantiated with any
verifiable comparative data of the advertiser’s institute and other similar mobile training institutes
to prove that it is in leadership position (No.1) than the rest in Odisha and Bhubaneshwar, in
providing training on mobile phone, computer, networking and digital camera, or through a third
party validation. The claim is misleading by exaggeration. The source for the claim was also not
indicated in the TVC. The TVC 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: Major Kalshi Classes
Claim Objected To:
“India’s No. 1 Defence Training Institute”
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in the
complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI
Secretariat. The advertiser had, however, not responded to ASCI’s request. The CCC noted that
no response was received from the advertiser prior to the prescribed due date for this complaint.
The CCC viewed the TVC and upon careful consideration of the complaint, and in the absence
of any comments or response from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “India’s
No. 1 Defence Training Institute”, was not substantiated with any verifiable comparative data of
the advertiser’s institute and other similar institutes to prove that it is in leadership position (No.1)
than the rest in India in providing training/courses in defence services, or through a third party
validation. The claim is misleading by exaggeration. The claim is likely to lead to grave or
widespread disappointment in the minds of consumers. The source for the claim was also not
indicated in the TVC. The TVC contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational
Institutions and Progams as well as Chapters I.1, I.2, I.4 and I.5 of the ASCI Code. The complaint
was UPHELD.
COMPANY: Dashmesh Academy
Claims Objected To:
1. The Most Trusted brand
2. The Best Results and maximum no. of selections in the toughest of Exams in India- IAS CAT
NABARD RBI
3. The Most Experienced Institute in North India
4. Best Team of Expert
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objections raised in the
complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI
Secretariat. The advertiser had, however, not responded to ASCI’s request. The CCC noted that
no response was received from the advertiser prior to the prescribed due date for this complaint.
The CCC viewed the print advertisement and upon careful consideration of the complaint, and in
the absence of any comments or response from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims,
“The Most Trusted brand”, “The Best Results and maximum no. of selections in the toughest of
Exams in India- IAS CAT NABARD RBI”, “The Most Experienced Institute in North India”,
and “Best Team of Expert”, were not substantiated with any market survey data, or any
verifiable comparative data of the advertiser’s institute and other similar institutes, or through a
third party validation. The claims are misleading by exaggeration. The source for the claim, “The
Most Trusted Brand”, was not indicated in the advertisement. The claim is likely to lead to grave
or widespread disappointment in the minds of consumers. The advertisement contravened the
Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1, I.2,
I.4 and I.5 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.
COMPANY: Aaroyam Ayurvedic Panchkarma Hospital and Research Centre Pvt. Ltd.
Claims Objected To:
1. Complete solution to obesity
2. Till now 30,000 patients benefited.
3. Easy to reduce up to 5-55 kg weight
4. Reduce weight up to 10-15 kg in one month through obesity killer kit.
Objections-
1. Visuals of testimonials are misleading and not representative of generally achievable
results.
2. Name of the product implies cure for Obesity
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objections raised in the
complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI
Secretariat. The advertiser had, however, not responded to ASCI’s request. The CCC noted that
no response was received from the advertiser prior to the prescribed due date for this complaint.
The CCC viewed the print advertisement and upon careful consideration of the complaint, and in
the absence of any comments or response from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims,
“Complete solution to obesity”, “Easy to reduce up to 5-55 kg weight”, and “Reduce weight up
to 10-15 kg in one month through obesity killer kit”, were not substantiated with clinical evidence
of product efficacy. The name of the product “Obesity Killer Kit” implies cure for obesity, which
is misleading. Specific to the claims implying the product used in the kit providing cure for
obesity, the advertisement is in Breach of the law as it violated The Drugs & Magic Remedies
Act (item 38 under DMR schedule). The claims are misleading by gross exaggeration and
exploits the consumers’ lack of knowledge and is likely to lead to grave or widespread
disappointment in the minds of consumers. Claim, “Till now 30,000 patients benefited”, was not
substantiated with supporting evidence of the patients who were benefitted by the use of the
product, or through a third party validation, and is misleading. Efficacy being depicted via
images of before and after the treatment are misleading. The advertisement contravened Chapters
I.1, I.4, I.5 and III.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.
COMPANY: Astha Clinic
Claims Objected To:
“Effective formula of herbal & homeopathic medicines, with regular use and diet kaya dosh is
removed and start producing melanin pigment in body naturally, which is helpful to cure white
spots”
“Thousands of patients benefitted Since 20 years in India-abroad”
Objection-
The before and after visuals in the advertisement appears to be misleading.
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objections raised in the
complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI
Secretariat. The advertiser had, however, not responded to ASCI’s request. The CCC noted that
no response was received from the advertiser prior to the prescribed due date for this complaint.
The CCC viewed the print advertisement and observed that the advertiser did not provide any
details of the treatment procedure nor any data for claimed treatment based on rigorous trial on
statistically significant number of patients. No details regarding the medicines, their approval
status by the regulatory authorities was provided by the advertiser. The CCC concluded that the
claims (in Hindi) as translated in English, “Effective formula of herbal & homeopathic medicines,
with regular use and diet kaya dosh is removed and start producing melanin pigment in body
naturally, which is helpful to cure white spots”, were not substantiated with clinical evidence.
Specific to the claims implying cure for White Spots with the use of the product, the
advertisement is in Breach of the law as it violated The Drugs & Magic Remedies Act (item 33
under DMR schedule). The claims are misleading by gross exaggeration and exploits the
consumers’ lack of knowledge and is likely to lead to grave or widespread disappointment in the
minds of consumers.
Claim, “Thousands of patients benefitted Since 20 years in India-abroad” was not substantiated
with supporting evidence of the patients who were benefitted by the treatment, or through a third
party validation, and is misleading. Efficacy being depicted via images of before and after the
treatment are misleading. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1, I.4, I.5 and III.4 of the
ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.
COMPANY: Herbal Health Care
Claims Objected To:
1. Permanent cure for Psoriasis
2. Permanent Solutions provided for diabetes and joint pain.
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objections raised in the
complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI
Secretariat. The advertiser had, however, not responded to ASCI’s request. The CCC noted that
no response was received from the advertiser prior to the prescribed due date for this complaint.
The CCC viewed the print advertisement and upon careful consideration of the complaint, and in
the absence of any comments or response from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims,
“Permanent cure for Psoriasis” and “Permanent Solutions provided for diabetes and joint pain”,
were not substantiated with supporting clinical evidence. Specific to the claims implying cure
for diabetes with the use of Herbal medicine, the advertisement is in Breach of the law as it
violated The Drugs & Magic Remedies Act (item 9 under DMR schedule). The claims are
misleading by gross exaggeration and exploits the consumers’ lack of knowledge and is likely to
lead to grave or widespread disappointment in the minds of consumers. The advertisement
contravened Chapters I.1, I.4, I.5 and III.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.
COMPANY: Livo Universal
PRODUCT: Immuno 1
Claim Objected To:
“You will never get ill”
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in the
complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI
Secretariat. The advertiser had, however, not responded to ASCI’s request. The CCC noted that
no response was received from the advertiser prior to the prescribed due date for this complaint.
The CCC viewed the print advertisement and upon careful consideration of the complaint, and in
the absence of any comments or response from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim,
“You will never get ill”, implying that the product being beneficial for all types of illnesses, was
not substantiated with product efficacy data. The claim is misleading by gross exaggeration and
exploits the consumers’ lack of knowledge and is likely to lead to grave or widespread
disappointment in the minds of consumers. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1, I.4 and
I.5 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.
COMPANY: Masters Homeopathy
Claims Objected To:
1. In homeo there are medicines available for controlling HIV
2. All the problems related to infertility are removed and the couples get success by conceiving.
3. The best medicines which can control Hepatitis B and C
4. After homeo treatment herpes will not be seen again
5. Homeo Treatment gives permanent solution for all pains related to neck and shoulder
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objections raised in the
complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI
Secretariat. The advertiser had, however, not responded to ASCI’s request. The CCC noted that
no response was received from the advertiser prior to the prescribed due date for this complaint.
The CCC viewed the print advertisement and upon careful consideration of the complaint, and in
the absence of any comments or response from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims,
“In homeo there are medicines available for controlling HIV”, “All the problems related to
infertility are removed and the couples get success by conceiving”, “The best medicines which
can control Hepatitis B and C”, “After homeo treatment herpes will not be seen again”, and
“Homeo Treatment gives permanent solution for all pains related to neck and shoulder”, were
not substantiated with supporting clinical evidence. Specific to the claims implying cure for
infertility with the use of their medicines, the advertisement is in Breach of the law as it violated
The Drugs & Magic Remedies Act (item 48 under DMR schedule). The claims are misleading
by gross exaggeration and exploits the consumers’ lack of knowledge and is likely to lead to
grave or widespread disappointment in the minds of consumers. The advertisement contravened
Chapters I.1, I.4, I.5 and III.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.
COMPANY: Dr Mukherjee Fertility Centre
Claim Objected To:
“Successful treatment of infertility through panchkarma and herbal medicine”
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in the
complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI
Secretariat. The advertiser had, however, not responded to ASCI’s request. The CCC noted that
no response was received from the advertiser prior to the prescribed due date for this complaint.
The CCC viewed the print advertisement and upon careful consideration of the complaint, and in
the absence of any comments or response from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim,
“Successful treatment of infertility through panchkarma and herbal medicine”, was not
substantiated with supporting clinical evidence. Specific to the claims implying cure for
infertility with the use of the herbal medicine, the advertisement is in Breach of the law as it
violated The Drugs & Magic Remedies Act (item 48 under DMR schedule). The claim is
misleading by gross exaggeration and exploits the consumers’ lack of knowledge and is likely to
lead to grave or widespread disappointment in the minds of consumers. The advertisement
contravened Chapters I.1, I.4, I.5 and III.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.
COMPANY: Sri Appollo Siddha Ayurveda Natural Unani Hospital
Claims Objected To:
1. Complete cure of Asthma problems by shree apollahvaidyashala (siddha-Ayurveda)
2. Those who did not get benefit from treatments in various places for diseases like Asthma,
Sinusitis, Joint pain, Psoriasis, after getting treatment from us, are not taking any
medicine And tablets, are living healthily and appreciating us
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objections raised in the
complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI
Secretariat. The advertiser had, however, not responded to ASCI’s request. The CCC noted that
no response was received from the advertiser prior to the prescribed due date for this complaint.
The CCC viewed the print advertisement and upon careful consideration of the complaint, and in
the absence of any comments or response from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim,
“Complete cure of Asthma problems by shree apollahvaidyashala (siddhaAyurveda)”, was not
substantiated with supporting clinical evidence. Specific to the claims of cure for Asthma with
the use of their medicine, the advertisement is in Breach of the law as it violated The Drugs &
Magic Remedies Act, Rule 6. Claim – “Those who did not get benefit from treatments in various
places for diseases like Asthma, Sinusitis, Joint pain, Psoriasis, after getting treatment from
us, are not taking any medicine And tablets, are living healthily and appreciating us”, was not
substantiated with supporting evidence of the patients who have benefitted by their treatment.
The claims are misleading by gross exaggeration and exploits the consumers’ lack of of
knowledge and is likely to lead to grave or widespread disappointment in the minds of consumers.
The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1, I.4, I.5 and III.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint
was UPHELD.
COMPANY: Dr. Batra’s Positive Health Clinic
PRODUCT: Dr. Batra’s Geno Homeopathy
Complaint:
I am forwarding an ad which appeared in a newspaper which is blatantly false stating that
homeopathy can predict and prevent genetic disorders.
1. Gene targeted homeopathy- This means that the drug targets the gene. There is no such
evidence in either homeopathy or even in other forms of medicine scientifically proven to
target a gene. Anti cancer therapy has molecules which target or block the proteins formed
due to defective genes but not the genes. gene editing technology may be able to do this in
future definitely not homeopathy
2. The statement that they would combine the goodness of homeopathy with science of genetics
is acceptable wherein the genetics identifies the defect
3. There is no available scientific information which shows how homeopathy can predict and
prevent genetic diseases several years before they appear. They should be able to substantiate
this statement.
4. Most of the diseases they have listed are not genetic disorders nor have the genomic signatures
of these diseases worked out yet. They are polygeneic and some are epigenetic than genetic.
Diseases of women is not a single disease, similarly several others are general diseases for
which we still dont have the exact genetic or epigenetic markers for any treatment to target.
They are using jargon to mislead the public. eg for weight management, stress management
are not genetic disorders and even if they have some genetic polymorphisms we still dont
know for sure.
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the
complainant and forwarded the details of the complaint, verbatim, to the advertiser with a request
to respond to the same. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the
ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser had, however, not responded to ASCI’s request. Feedback was
sought from a technical expert on the merits of the complaint. The CCC noted that no response
was received from the advertiser prior to the prescribed due date for this complaint. The CCC
viewed the print advertisement, and observed that Homoeopathy is an ancient medicine, and not
a modern medicine. It is based on the Principle of “Similia Similibus Curanter” (any drug capable
of producing detrimental symptoms in a healthy individual will relieve similar symptoms
occurring as an expression of disease). Thus the Gene based treatment cannot be termed as pure
Homoeopathy, where the very Principle of the “pathy” is not followed. Diagnosis and treatment
in homoeopathy is based on history of the patient and signs and symptoms. Out of these, history
forms very important tool for prescription of medicine, and not the genetic analysis. It is not
possible to give homoeopathic treatment unless and until the symptoms appear. Geno
Homoeopathy is not recognized branch in India. Based on this assessment, the CCC concluded
that the claims, “Gene-targeted homeopathic therapy”, “Predict and prevent genetic diseases 15-
20 years before they show up in other tests safely in Homeopathy”, and “With Geno Homeopathy,
we combine the goodness of Homeopathy with the science of genetics to enhance treatment
results”, were not substantiated and are misleading by exaggeration. The claims exploit
consumers’ lack of knowledge and are likely to lead to grave or widespread disappointment in
the minds of consumers. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1, I.4 and I.5 of the ASCI
Code. The complaint was UPHELD.
COMPANY: Dr. Batra’s Positive Health Clinic
Claim Objected To:
“The Homeopathy tablets removes/ get rid of diseases forever”
Objection-
Visuals imply increase in stature of the child.
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in the
complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI
Secretariat. The advertiser had, however, not responded to ASCI’s request. The CCC noted that
no response was received from the advertiser prior to the prescribed due date for this complaint.
The CCC viewed the TVC and upon careful consideration of the complaint, and in the absence
of any comments or response from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “The
Homeopathy tablets removes/ get rid of diseases forever”, was not substantiated with supporting
clinical evidence. Specific to the visual showing increase in stature of a minor, implying height
increase with the use of their Homeopathy tablets, the TVC is in Breach of the law as it violated
The Drugs & Magic Remedies Act (Item No.47 under DMR Schedule). The claim is misleading
by gross exaggeration and exploits the consumers’ lack of knowledge and is likely to lead to
grave or widespread disappointment in the minds of consumers. The TVC contravened Chapters
I.1, I.4, I.5 and III.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.
COMPANY: Dr. Batra’s Positive Health Clinic
PRODUCT: Dr. Batra’s Geno Homeopathy
Complaint:
Advertising Geno-Homeopathy
#GenoHomeopathy ?? Really !!
There is no such science as Geno-Homeopathy
Pseudo version of an already #PseudoScience =#Quackery.
Misleading gullible people. Strange bedfellows -#Homeopathy & #Genetics.
Hahnemann system developed in 1796 has been given up even in Germany. It has been stopped
even by National Health Services - UK
Where are the Indian govt regulations regarding spread of false medical treatment assumptions.
Such medical treatments which are not proven by Science are banned under Drug & Magical
Remedies Act – 1954
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the
complainant and forwarded the details of the complaint, verbatim, to the advertiser with a request
to respond to the same. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the
ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser had, however, not responded to ASCI’s request. Feedback was
sought from a technical expert on the merits of the complaint. The CCC noted that no response
was received from the advertiser prior to the prescribed due date for this complaint. The CCC
viewed the print advertisement, and observed that Homoeopathy is an ancient medicine, and not
a modern medicine. It is based on the Principle of “Similia Similibus Curanter” (any drug capable
of producing detrimental symptoms in a healthy individual will relieve similar symptoms
occurring as an expression of disease). Thus the Gene based treatment cannot be termed as pure
Homoeopathy, where the very Principle of the “pathy” is not followed. Diagnosis and treatment
in homoeopathy is based on history of the patient and signs and symptoms. Out of these, history
forms very important tool for prescription of medicine, and not the genetic analysis. It is not
possible to give homoeopathic treatment unless and until the symptoms appear. Geno
Homoeopathy is not recognized branch in India. Based on this assessment, the CCC concluded
that the claim, “Geno Homeopathy – a break through treatment based on Gene Analysis for
ailments across all age groups”, was not substantiated and is misleading by exaggeration. The
claim exploits consumers’ lack of knowledge and is likely to lead to grave or widespread
disappointment in the minds of consumers. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1, I.4 and
I.5 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.
COMPANY: Huxley’s Company (India)
PRODUCT: Wintogeno Pain Reliever
Claims Objected to:
1. Most reliable and powerful pain reliever since 1899
2. No harmful ingredients used
3. Apply Wintogeno two times a day and take Wintogeno joint pain tablet twice in a day
after meals and experience the double relief.
Complaint
Our objections:
1. With reference to claim 1 and 2, please substantiate with claim support data. The claim
support data should not be based on internal studies or studies commissioned by Huxley
and Company (India).
2. Is the claimed effect delivered only on using both the ointment and the tablet? If yes,
will it not have side effects? If it does, then claim 2 is misleading. According to us, the
advertisement contravenes the ASCI Codes of Chapter 1.1, 1.2 and 1.4. Action to be
taken: We propose the advertisement should be immediately withdrawn.”
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI approached the concerned Media (Bennett Coleman & Co Ltd) for their assistance in
providing the contact details of the advertiser, or to forward the grievances of the complainant to
the advertiser. The CCC noted that no response was received from the advertiser or from the
concerned media prior to the due date. The CCC viewed the print advertisement. In the absence
of response from the concerned media and comments from the advertiser, the CCC concluded
that the claim, “Most reliable and powerful pain reliever since 1899”, was not substantiated with
any verifiable comparative data on year basis since 1899 of the advertiser’s product and other
competitive pain reliever products in the same category for the claimed benefit, or through a third
party validation. Claim, “No harmful ingredients used”, was not substantiated with evidence of
approval from regulatory authorities for the product. Claim, “Apply Wintogeno two times a day
and take Wintogeno joint pain tablet twice in a day after meals and experience the double relief”,
was not substantiated with any scientific or technical data. The claims are misleading by
exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The
complaint was UPHELD.
COMPANY: Dr. Gaur Hari Singhania Institute of Management & Research
Claim Objected To: “100% Placement
support”
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in the
complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI
Secretariat. The advertiser had, however, not responded to ASCI’s request. The CCC noted that
no response was received from the advertiser prior to the prescribed due date for this complaint.
The CCC viewed the print advertisement and upon careful consideration of the complaint, and in
the absence of any comments or response from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that while the
advertiser may be providing placement support to their students, the use of 100% numerical is
not relevant for “Placement support” claim. The use of “100%” as a descriptor in the claim is
misleading by implication and is likely to lead to grave or widespread disappointment in the
minds of consumers. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational
Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.4 and I.5 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was
UPHELD.
COMPANY: Asian Business School
Claim Objected To:
“Highest package offered 15 lac/p.a.”
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in
the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI
Secretariat which they did not avail, but submitted their written response. The advertiser had
stated in their response that the claim is made on the basis of the job offer provided by
Amazon.com to their students during their recruitment season. However, none of the students
were selected during the interview process. Advertiser provided a copy of the Amazon offer
letter giving the job description and remuneration to be offered for the position of ̀ Team Manager
– Customer Service’ at CTC 15.25. Upon carefully viewing the print advertisement examining
the complaint and the response given by the advertiser, the CCC noted that Amazon had only
provided an offer subject to pre-requisites being met by the students. While the advertiser asserted
that none of the student could crack the interview process, the advertiser did not share the details
of the shortlisted provided to Amazonas per their pre-requisites. The CCC concluded that the
claim, “Highest package offered 15 lac/p.a”, was misleading by ambiguity and implication that
the said offer was achievable by their students. The print 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: Brij Education Trust-BIMT Gurgaon
Claim Objected To: “100% Placement
Assurance”
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in the
complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI
Secretariat. The advertiser had, however, not responded to ASCI’s request. The CCC noted that
no response was received from the advertiser prior to the prescribed due date for this complaint.
The CCC viewed the print advertisement and upon careful consideration of the complaint, and in
the absence of any comments or response from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim,
“100% Placement Assurance”, was not substantiated with supporting data, and is misleading by
implication and exaggeration. The claim is likely to lead to grave or widespread disappointment
in the minds of consumers. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of
Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1, I.4 and I.5 of the ASCI Code. The
complaint was UPHELD.
COMPANY: Deen Dayal Upadhya Institute of Management & Higher Studies
Claim Objected To:
“First Placement Lab in India for 100% Placement”
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in the
complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI
Secretariat. The advertiser had, however, not responded to ASCI’s request. The CCC noted that
no response was received from the advertiser prior to the prescribed due date for this complaint.
The CCC viewed the print advertisement and upon careful consideration of the complaint, and in
the absence of any comments or response from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim,
“First Placement Lab in India”, was not substantiated with any verifiable comparative data of the
advertiser’s institute and other similar institutes to prove that they are the first in India than the
rest for providing placements to their students, or through a third party validation. Claim of
“100% Placement” was not substantiated with authentic supporting data such as detailed list of
students who have been placed through their Institute, contact details of students for verification,
enrolment forms and appointment letters received by the students, nor any independent audit or
verification certificate. The claim is misleading by exaggeration and is likely to lead to grave or
widespread disappointment in the minds of consumers. The print advertisement contravened
Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1, I.4
and I.5 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.
COMPANY: Bharitya Vidya Bhavan’s Centre for Communication & Management (BCCM)
Claim Objected To:
“100% placement”
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in the
complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI
Secretariat. The advertiser had, however, not responded to ASCI’s request. The CCC noted that
no response was received from the advertiser prior to the prescribed due date for this complaint.
The CCC viewed the print advertisement and upon careful consideration of the complaint, and in
the absence of any comments or response from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim,
“100% Placement”, was not substantiated with authentic supporting data such as detailed list of
students who have been placed through their Institute, contact details of students for verification,
enrolment forms and appointment letters received by the students, nor any independent audit or
verification certificate. The claim is misleading by exaggeration and is likely to lead to grave or
widespread disappointment in the minds of consumers. The print advertisement contravened
Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1, I.4
and I.5 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.
COMPANY: Shri Ram Murti Smarak College of Engineering & Technology
Claim Objected To:
“100% placement for eligible candidates every year in companies of global repute”
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in the
complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI
Secretariat. The advertiser had, however, not responded to ASCI’s request. The CCC noted that
no response was received from the advertiser prior to the prescribed due date for this complaint.
The CCC viewed the print advertisement and upon careful consideration of the complaint, and in
the absence of any comments or response from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim,
“100% placement for eligible candidates every year in companies of global repute”, was not
substantiated with authentic supporting data such as detailed list of students who have been
placed through their Institute every year, with contact details of students for verification,
enrolment forms and appointment letters received by the students, nor any independent audit or
verification certificate. The claim is misleading by exaggeration and is likely to lead to grave or
widespread disappointment in the minds of consumers. The print advertisement contravened
Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1, I.4
and I.5 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.
COMPANY: Accurate Group of Institutions
PRODUCT: Accurate Inst. of Mgt & Technology
Claim Objected To:
“100% Placement track record”
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in the
complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI
Secretariat. The advertiser had, however, not responded to ASCI’s request. The CCC noted that
no response was received from the advertiser prior to the prescribed due date for this complaint.
The CCC viewed the print advertisement and upon careful consideration of the complaint, and in
the absence of any comments or response from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim,
“100% Placement track record”, was not substantiated with authentic supporting data such as
detailed list of students who have been placed through their Institute every year, contact details
of students for verification, enrolment forms and appointment letters received by the students,
nor any independent audit or verification certificate. The claim is misleading by exaggeration
and is likely to lead to grave or widespread disappointment in the minds of consumers. The print
advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs
as well as Chapters I.1, I.4 and I.5 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.
COMPANY: INDUS University
PRODUCT: Indus Institute of Management Studies
Claim Objected To:
“Track Record Of 100% Quality Placements”
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in the
complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI
Secretariat. The advertiser had, however, not responded to ASCI’s request. The CCC noted that
no response was received from the advertiser prior to the prescribed due date for this complaint.
The CCC viewed the print advertisement and upon careful consideration of the complaint, and in
the absence of any comments or response from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim,
“Track Record Of 100% Quality Placements”, was not substantiated with authentic supporting
data such as detailed list of students who have been placed through their Institute every year,
contact details of students for verification, enrolment forms and appointment letters received by
the students, nor any independent audit or verification certificate. The claim is misleading by
exaggeration and is likely to lead to grave or widespread disappointment in the minds of
consumers. The print advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational
Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1, I.4 and I.5 of the ASCI Code. The complaint
was UPHELD.
COMPANY: Jamia Hamdard
Claim Objected To: “100% Placement
Assistance”
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in the
complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI
Secretariat. The advertiser had, however, not responded to ASCI’s request. The CCC noted that
no response was received from the advertiser prior to the prescribed due date for this complaint.
The CCC viewed the print advertisement and upon careful consideration of the complaint, and in
the absence of any comments or response from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that while the
advertiser may be providing placement assistance to their students, the use of 100% numerical is
not relevant for “Placement Assistance” claim. The use of “100%” as a descriptor in the claim
is misleading by implication and is likely to lead to grave or widespread disappointment in the
minds of consumers. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational
Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.4 and I.5 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was
UPHELD.
COMPANY: Accurate Group of Institutions
PRODUCT: Accurate Institute of Advanced Management
Claim Objected To:
100% Placement Assistance
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in the
complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI
Secretariat. The advertiser had, however, not responded to ASCI’s request. The CCC noted that
no response was received from the advertiser prior to the prescribed due date for this complaint.
The CCC viewed the print advertisement and upon careful consideration of the complaint, and in
the absence of any comments or response from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that while the
advertiser may be providing placement assistance to their students, the use of 100% numerical is
not relevant for “Placement Assistance” claim. The use of “100%” as a descriptor in the claim
is misleading by implication and is likely to lead to grave or widespread disappointment in the
minds of consumers. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational
Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.4 and I.5 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was
UPHELD.
COMPANY: Science & Technology Entrepreneurs Park-HBTI, Kanpur
Claim Objected To: “100% Placement Support”
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in the
complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI
Secretariat. The advertiser had, however, not responded to ASCI’s request. The CCC noted that
no response was received from the advertiser prior to the prescribed due date for this complaint.
The CCC viewed the print advertisement and upon careful consideration of the complaint, and in
the absence of any comments or response from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that while the
advertiser may be providing placement support to their students, the use of 100% numerical is
not relevant for “Placement Support” claim. The use of “100%” as a descriptor in the claim is
misleading by implication and is likely to lead to grave or widespread disappointment in the
minds of consumers. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational
Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.4 and I.5 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was
UPHELD.
COMPANY: Moti Lal Nehru School of Management
Claim Objected To: “100% Placement Assistance”
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in
the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI
Secretariat which they did not avail, but submitted their written response post the due date. The
advertiser had stated in their response that their institute provides help to their students in career
counseling, preparing them for interviews, and holding discussions with them for appropriate job
leads that are in line with their skill level.
The CCC viewed the print advertisement and upon careful consideration of the complaint, and
the response given by the advertiser, the CCC concluded that while the advertiser may be
providing placement assistance to their students, the use of 100% numerical is not relevant for
“Placement Assistance” claim for the courses being offered. The use of “100%” as a descriptor
in the claim is misleading by implication and is likely to lead to grave or widespread
disappointment in the minds of consumers. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for
Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.4 and I.5 of the ASCI
Code. The complaint was UPHELD.
COMPANY: R.L. Institute of Management Studies
Claim Objected To:
“Ensures 100% Placement Assistance”.
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in
the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI
Secretariat which they did not avail, but submitted their written response. Advertiser stated in
their response that they give placement assistance to conduct placement drive in their campus
and provide opportunities for their students to participate in interviews and to facilitate relevant
job placement in their respective domain. Advertiser in their response provided summary table
showing Placement assistant details for 2018 batch, giving student’s name, their roll numbers,
and companies in which the students were placed.
The CCC viewed the print advertisement and upon careful consideration of the complaint, and
the response given by the advertiser, the CCC concluded that while the advertiser may be
providing placement assistance to their students, the use of 100% numerical is not relevant for
“Ensures Placement Assistance” claim. The use of “100%” as a descriptor in the claim is
misleading by implication and is likely to lead to grave or widespread disappointment in the
minds of consumers. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational
Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.4 and I.5 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was
UPHELD.
COMPANY: OJB Herbals Pvt. Ltd.
PRODUCT: Oshea Herbals UV Shield Sunscreen Gel
Claims:
1. Made with ext. of porphyra umbilicalis a natural U.V. protection factor, vertiver, aloevera,
carrot, cucumber & chamomile is ideal for specially in hot and humid weather.
2. Protect you from all forms of sun damage like tanning, sun spots and premature ageing
3. Lightens skin by regulating its skin darkening pigments.
Objections:
1. Please substantiate claims 1 to 3 using claim support data. The claim support data should
not be internal or based on studies commissioned by OJB Herbals Pvt. Ltd.
2. Is the amount of ingredients as stated in claim 1 significant to make an impact on the
performance of the product as claimed? Is the efficacy data specific to the benefits of the
formulation attributable to the claimed ingredients provided?
3. Can the advertiser prove that the product as sold in its present form has the effectiveness
of each and all of the ingredients as is being claimed in the advertisement since the ingredients
appear to have symbolic presence in the product?
According to us, the advertisement contravenes Chapter 1.1 and 1.4 of the ASCI Code. Action to
be taken: We propose that the advertisement should be immediately withdrawn.
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the
complainant and forwarded the details of the complaint, verbatim, to the advertiser with a request
to respond to the same. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the
ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser had, however, not responded to ASCI’s request. The CCC noted
that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the prescribed due date for this
complaint. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and observed that the advertiser did not
provide copy of Product approval license / product label, and Product composition details. The
CCC concluded that the claim, “Made with ext. of porphyra umbilicalis a natural U.V. protection
factor, vertiver, aloevera, carrot, cucumber & chamomile is ideal for specially in hot and humid
weather”, was not substantiated with supporting data showing presence of these ingredients in
the product. Claims, “Protect you from all forms of sun damage like tanning, sun spots and
premature ageing”, and “Lightens skin by regulating its skin darkening pigments”, were not
substantiated with any technical data, scientific rationale or evidence of product efficacy, and are
misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI
Code. The complaint was accordingly UPHELD.
COMPANY: Lupin Ltd
PRODUCT: Corcal
Claims Objected to:
1. Made from 100% natural coral grains
2. Contains more than 70 trace minerals like gold, silver, zinc, iron
and selenium 3. Coral helps strengthen bones and maintains
healthy hair, skin and nails
Complaint:
Objections:
1. Please substantiate claims 1 and 3 with claim support data. The claim support data
should not be internal or based on studies commissioned by Lupin Ltd.
2. Reference to claim 1; is the amount of ingredients significant to make an impact on the
performance of the product as claimed? Is the efficacy data specific to the benefits of
the formulation attributable to the chemical ingredients provided?
3. Reference to claim 1; can the advertiser prove that the product as sold in its present form
has the effectiveness of each and all of the ingredients as is being claimed in the
advertisement since the ingredients appear to have symbolic presence in the product?
4. Reference to claim 3; these are the benefits of coral. Mentioning them implies that the
product would also impart these benefits. This needs to be substantiated with
independent data.
According to us, the advertisement contravenes Chapter 1.1 and 1.4 of the ASCI Code. Action to
be taken: We propose that the advertisement should be immediately withdrawn
CCC RECOMMENDATION: NOT UPHELD
The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the
complainant and forwarded the details of the complaint, verbatim, to the advertiser with a request
to respond to the same. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the
ASCI Secretariat which they availed and submitted their written response. The advertiser had
stated in their response that the Corcal Bone & Beauty is a health supplement meant to
supplement normal nutrition of an individual. The product has Coral grains as the key ingredient
which is capable of helping the consumer retain the inherent normalness of bone, hair, skin and
nails. Advertiser provided a soft copy of the product label along with product composition
details, and product approval license. For the claims objected to, the advertiser submitted a copy
of certificate of Composition from Coral LLC that the raw Coral supplied comes from the sea
sources and is composed of 100% fossilized Coral, a certificate of Analysis of the Product, and
references from Ayurvedic Texts which have direct mention of benefits of corals. The claim
support data was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC viewed the print
advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response as well as the opinion of Technical expert
presented at the meeting. The CCC observed that the advertiser had substantiated the product
composition as well as presence of >70 trace minerals. The benefits of Coral are well documented
and by virtue of the product being made from 100% natural coral grains and having Calcium
Carbonate, the product is bound to give the claimed benefits. Based on the advertiser’s response
with the supporting data provided, the CCC concluded that the claims, “Made from 100% natural
coral grains”, “Contains more than 70 trace minerals like gold, silver, zinc, iron and selenium”,
and “Coral helps strengthen bones and maintains healthy hair, skin and nails”, were substantiated.
The CCC also observed that the VCO complainant appears to use a standard template to register
multiple complaints regardless of the product category type and demands specific support data
for all claims across all advertisements without providing reason why the claim cannot be
substantiated. The CCC noted that objection being raised by the complainant that “can the
advertiser prove that the product as sold in its present form has the effectiveness of each and all
of the ingredients as is being claimed in the advertisement since the ingredients appear to have
symbolic presence in the product” was not valid as the product had substantial quantity of
Calcium Carbonate. Complainant’s demand that Benefits of Coral be substantiated with
independent data was also not valid since the benefits of the ingredient is already well
documented in scientific literature. The CCC recommended that the ASCI Secretariat should ask
the VCO complainant to provide clear basis for objection to claims in their complaints. And
clarified that the technical expert of the CCC will decide on the origin of the basis of the claim
support data. The complaint was NOT UPHELD.
COMPANY: Marico Ltd
PRODUCT: Saffola Gold Oil
Claim objected to:
“The oil has the strength / power of antioxidants” “Mera Saffola Gold de 3 antioxidants ki shakti.
Aur aap ka oil ?”
Objections:
The advertiser misrepresents its product to be beneficial by indirectly denigrating other oils as
not having health benefits. What is meant by 3 oxidants? What benefit can the anti oxidant/s
provide to the user on consumption of the oil? Will the user derive any strength by consuming
products cooked or fried in the oil? The ad implies that the use of oil gives the consumer the
strength and befits of oil consumption, which appears to be totally false and misleading. The
advertisement appeared on the bus in Girgaum, Mumbai.
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in
the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI
Secretariat which they availed and subsequently submitted their written response. The advertiser
stated in their response that Saffola Gold, on account of its composition (i.e. 80% refined rice
bran oil and 20% safflower seed oil) contains following natural antioxidants – Oryzanol, Alpha-
Tocopherols (Vitamin E), Tocotrienols, Phytosterols, and Squalene. These anti-oxidants form
an integral part of the Saffola Gold formulation and composition and hence the advantage of
these anti-oxidants can be derived when oil is consumed or food prepared in the oil is consumed.
As claim support data, the advertiser provided relevant published articles and journal references
on Rice Bran Oil containing above antioxidants, Copy of the product label, various antioxidants
and nutrients in Saffola Gold, extract of Richard O’ Brien textbook, and Scientific literature on
the benefits derived from each such antioxidant. The CCC viewed the Ad – hoarding (displayed
on a Bus) and considered the Advertiser’s response as well as the opinion of the Technical expert
presented at the meeting. The CCC observed that the antioxidants (Oryzanol, Tocopherols,
Tocotrienols) are natural antioxidants which are present in Rice bran oil that forms 80% in the
Saffola Gold, and the product also has Phytosterols and squalene. The reference to TBHQ, Citric
acid and Polydimethyl Siloxilane which are permitted anti-oxidants that contribute to extend the
shelf life of refined vegetable oils was not considered relevant in the context of the advertisement
as the advertisement implied physiological benefit due to presence of heart shaped images. It was
very ambiguous which three antioxidants were being referred to in the advertisement.
The CCC noted that while the product may have the natural anti-oxidants, a vegetable oil is not
consumed as such. It is used as a cooking medium and during this process a number of changes
take place with respect to its ingredients. It was not adequately substantiated if a consumer would
derive the “power” of the three antioxidants when used as a cooking medium and post
consumption of fried food. Moreover, the fatty acid and triglyceride composition also plays an
important role in managing lifestyle diseases . Several research studies are in progress in
understanding role of cooking oils in prevention of lifestyle diseases. No definite conclusions
have been arrived at so far. Experts are recommending to change cooking oils frequently and get
the maximum benefits from all tyes of oils rather than sticking to only one type of oil whereas
the advertisement is suggesting to consumers to switch over to one brand due to the presence of
three anti-oxidants. The CCC concluded that the claim, “Mera Saffola Gold de 3 antioxidants ki
Shakti”, was misleading by ambiguity and implication. The Ad – Hoarding contravened
Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.
The CCC did not consider the advertisement to be denigrating to competition. This complaint
was NOT UPHELD.
COMPANY: Oziva- Nutritional Meal Replacement Shake for women
Claims objected to:
“Meal Replacement Shake”
“Enriched with Ayurvedic Herbs and added Vitamins & Minerals for Weight Loss & Improved
Metabolism” “Delicious Shake that saves 500-700 calories vs. a Regular Meal”
Objections: 1. Reference to claims 1 - 3 please substantiate with claim support data. The data
should not be internal or based on studies commissioned by Oziva. 2. Reference to claim 1; is
the amount of the ayuredic herbs and added vitamins and minerals significant to make an impact
on the performance of the product as claimed? Is the efficacy data specific to the benefits of the
formulation attributable to the claimed ingredients provided? 3.Reference to claim1; can the
advertiser prove that the product as sold in its present form has the effectiveness of each and all
of the ingredients as is being claimed in the advertisement since the ingredients appear to have
symbolic presence in the product? 4. Reference to claim 1; body weight depends on several
factors like metabolism, genes, and lifestyle then how can the same outcome be obtained for
everyone? Please substantiate. 5. Reference to claim 2; as per ASCI guidelines of advertising of
Food and Beverages,‘Advertisements for food or beverages unless nutritionally designed as
such should not be promoted or portrayed as a meal replacement’. Advertisements should not
disparage good dietary practice or the selection of options, such as fresh fruits and vegetables
that accepted dietary opinion recommends should form part of the normal diet’. According
to us, the advertisement contravenes Chapter 1.1 and 1.4 of ASCI code and the provisions of
Guidelines of advertising of food and beverages. Action to be taken: We propose that the
advertisement should be immediately withdrawn. In order to process the complaint further we
have highlighted three most important claims from the six claims listed by ASCI.
1. Meal Replacement Shake
2. Enriched with Ayurvedic Herbs and added Vitamins & Minerals for Weight Loss &
Improved Metabolism.
3. Delicious Shake that saves 500-700 calories vs. a Regular Meal
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the
complainant and forwarded the details of the complaint, verbatim, to the advertiser with a request
to respond to the same. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the
ASCI Secretariat which they availed via telecon, and submitted their written response.
As claim support data, the advertiser provided Soft copy of product Label, Website article on
Oziva nutritional meal shake, published research papers and articles on weight control by high
protein meal replacement, and high protein diet in liquid form in weight management, published
research papers on the role of ayurvedic herbs – Tulsi and Shatavari, and a detailed research paper
on Garcinia Cambogia for controlling fat metabolism. The claim support data was reviewed by
the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the
Advertiser’s response as well as the opinion of Technical expert presented at the meeting. The
CCC observed that the advertiser did not submit a copy of the manufacturing licence for the
product category. The product appears more like a food for Special Dietary Use under the Food
Safety standards (Health Supplements, Nutraceuticals, Food for special Medical Purpose,
Functional Food and Novel Food) Regulation 2016. There was no affirmation whether the said
product was made in compliance with and as per the standards laid down as per FSSAI. The
advertiser asserts that Nutritional meal shake for women is a nutrient rich, portion controlled
meal replacer which provides only 123 calories. However, this was not considered to be
appropriate since it did not meet the criteria laid down by FSSAI for Food for replacement of one
or more meals. The CCC observed that the advertiser did not provide comparative data comparing
against per serve recommended for Oziva nutritional meal shake versus regular meal, particularly
for a woman as mentioned in the advertisement. No evidence was provided by the advertiser
regarding presence of Ayurvedic herbs, vitamins and minerals in the product and how these
ingredients as part of the product have an impact on weight loss or metabolism. The CCC did not
consider extrapolation of studies done on different products as cited in various literature
references provided by the advertiser to be extrapolable to the advertised product. The CCC
concluded that claims “Meal Replacement Shake”, “Enriched with Ayurvedic Herbs and added
Vitamins & Minerals for Weight Loss & Improved Metabolism”, “Delicious Shake that saves
500-700 calories vs. a Regular Meal” were not adequately substantiated. The claims are
misleading by ambiguity. The website advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the
ASCI Code and Clauses 2 and 7 of Guidelines on Advertising of Foods & Beverages. The
complaint was UPHELD.
COMPANY: Siddhant Lime Pvt Ltd
PRODUCT: Siddhant Pure Drinking Lime
Claims Objected To:
“Antibiotic, antipyretic, antifungal, anti-inflammatory”
“Consuming 3-4 drops a day can let you get rid of any kind of pain”
CCC RECOMMENDATION: Exparte
The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objections raised in the
complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI
Secretariat. The advertiser had, however, not responded to ASCI’s request. The CCC noted that
no response was received from the advertiser prior to the prescribed due date for this complaint.
The CCC viewed the TVC and observed that the advertiser did not submit any product specific
details such as composition / licence / pack artwork or samples and FSSAI approval for the
product. In the absence of claim support data, the CCC concluded that the claims, “Antibiotic,
antipyretic, antifungal, anti-inflammatory”, and “Consuming 3-4 drops a day can let you get rid
of any kind of pain”, were not substantiated with any scientific rationale or evidence of product
efficacy, and are misleading by exaggeration. The TVC contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the
ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.
The following advertisement was considered to be, prima facie, in violation of The Drugs & Magic
Remedies Act / The Drugs & Cosmetics Rules, and are being referred to the Ministry of AYUSH:-
Sr. No
Advertiser (Brand Product)
/
Claim/S Objected To Remarks (Clause Applicable)
1. Mahashi
Ayurveda-
Diab 99.9
Most effective medicine on diabetes till now.
100 percent natural diabetes killer.
Objection:
The above claim imply cure for
Diabetes.
Diabetes -Item no- 9 DMR Schedule
COMPANY: Times Network Ltd (Times Now)
Complaint:
On Air Promotion of Times Now on 12th Jul'18, claiming number one channel in BARC Week
27'18.
On 12th Jul'18, Times Now has claimed no. 1 channel in BARC week 27'18. Times Now referred
Target Group NCCS AB 22-50. According to BARC guidelines, Broadcasters cannot used sliced
TG like NCCS AB 22-50. BARC guidelines recommended NCCS 2+, NCCS 15 or NCCS 22+.
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the
complainant and forwarded the details of the complaint, verbatim, to the advertiser with a request
to respond to the same. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the
ASCI Secretariat which they did not avail, but submitted their written response. The advertiser
had stated in their response that they have complied with BARC recommendation of using
permissible TG NCCS AB 22-50 in their communication, and have specified the upper age limit
of the TG.
The claim support data was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC viewed the TV
– promo and considered the Advertiser’s response as well as the opinion of Technical expert
presented at the meeting. The CCC observed that the BARC source “NCCB AB 2-50 [All India
1 Mn+ Wk 23-27’18] quoted in the TV - promo established that their leadership claim is based
on four weeks data. As the target group NCCB AB 22-50 can be directly queried from the
BARC system, the CCC did not consider such reference to be objectionable in the context of the
advertisement. However, the CCC concluded that the TV – promo was misleading by omission
to mention that their channel is No.1 in English News genre. The TV – promo contravened
Chapter I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.
COMPANY: ARG Outlier Media (Republic TV)
Complaint:
A. Kindly, refer to the attached e-mailer published and circulated by Republic TV (RTV)
through advertiser -- BestMediaInfo.com.
The e-mailer is an advertisement wherein RTV has claimed No. 1 position for continuous 60
weeks on the basis of source line being : BARC|Market-India 1Mn+|Period:Wk 23’18 to Wk
26’18|Target Group:NCCS AB M22+|Time: 2100-2300|Days: Workdays
B. Our complaint:
1. RTV has used only 2 hours of BARC data to stake No.1 position, which is impermissible
and in violation of BARC regulations;
2. RTV has claimed 53.1% market share based on faulty and impermissible 2 hours of
BARC data, which is again a violation of BARC regulations;
3. RTV has not provided any substantiation and/or proof to its claim of 60 weeks of
continuous leadership position;
4. RTV has disparaged our channel ‘Times Now’ by publishing an incorrect, faulty and
fraudulent market share of 23.2% of our channel (the correct share is 38.7%);
5. RTV has sliced BARC data to achieve its artificial and fraudulent market share and
reduced market share of other channels;
6. RTV has disparaged all channels operational in India, by claiming to create ‘A New
Record In Indian Television’ based on either impermissible and incorrect BARC data and/or
non-substantiation, thereof.
The correct BARC data for weeks 23-26’18:
Channels Avg TVTs Share
Times Now 491 38.7%
RTV 456 35.9%
CNN News18 92 7.3%
India Today 137 10.8%
NDTV 24x7 68 5.4%
News X 25 2.0%
Genre 1,270 100.0%
Source: BARC| Market: All India 1Mn+| TG:NCCS AB 22+ Males | Period: Wk 23-26'18|
C. Lately, RTV has filed complaints against our channel on trivial grounds; whereas, as
said, right from 1st week of its operation, RTV started making No.1 and leadership claims.
And, thereafter, till date, week on week, by using on 2 hours of BARC data i.e. 2100-2300
hours, it is now claiming to hold No.1 position for continuous 60 weeks, and claims to have
created some sort of history in Indian Television.
D. Anyway, this is an open and shut case, like RTV’s previous advertisements, which is
attached here as Annexure “A”, for your information, assistance and necessary actions under
advertising regulations. Importantly, we urge the respected Council to send a stern warning to
RTV for restraining it from further dilution of BARC regulations and the regime of self-
regulation.
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the
complainant and forwarded the details of the complaint, verbatim, to the advertiser with a request
to respond to the same. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the
ASCI Secretariat which they did not avail, but submitted their written response. The claim
support data was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC viewed the TV – promo
and considered the Advertiser’s response as well as the opinion of Technical expert presented at
the meeting. Objection 1 - RTV has used only 2 hours of BARC data to stake No.1 position,
which is impermissible and in violation of BARC regulations –
Advertiser stated that in accordance with BARC Single Event reporting guidelines, Republic TV
has used two hours viewership data (2100-2300) which is super prime time property of the
channel runs on weekdays. The time band 2100-2300 on Republic TV has 30% viewership
contribution to the total.
The CCC observed that Republic TV have taken advantage of the BARC Rules for reporting of
Single Events which allows leadership claims based on a single event of a duration exceeding 30
minutes. The time band 2100-2300 is dedicated to a single, extended show anchored by Arnab
Goswami: On the debate. However, the claim “Unbeaten No. 1” is misleading by omission of
disclaimers, and contravened Chapter 1.4 of the ASCI Code. This complaint was UPHELD.
Objection 2 - RTV has claimed 53.1% market share based on faulty and impermissible 2 hours
of BARC data, which is again a violation of BARC regulations –
In response to this objection, the advertiser stated that this market share is claimed in defined
super prime time band which is based on average of Wk. 23'18 to WK. 26'18.
The CCC observed that while the 2-hour band under the ‘Single Events’ reporting rules was not
objectionable, as it being permissible under BARC rules, the claim of “53.1% market share” was
in violation of Section B (i) of BARC guidelines, which states “Ratings may only be expressed
as Rating (000)s, use of Rating % not permitted”. The Ad – mailer contravened Chapter I.3 of
the ASCI Code. This complaint was UPHELD.
Objection 3 - RTV has not provided any substantiation and/or proof to its claim of 60 weeks of
continuous leadership position –
Advertiser stated that though the mailer did not display the 60 week data the fact is Republic TV
has maintained over 50% share for the 2100-2300, weekday slot.
The CCC observed that the advertiser’s response quoted a table showing market shares for the
period wk 19, ’17 to wk 26,’18. Reporting shares is in principle disallowed by the BARC
Guidelines. However, the shares are presumably based on Ratings (000s) which have been
computed as percentage numbers. While the Ratings (000s) was acceptable, however, using
percentages for indicating rating was is in violation of BARC Guidelines. The Ad – mailer
contravened Chapter I.3 of the ASCI Code. This complaint was UPHELD.
Objection 4. - RTV has disparaged the channel ‘Times Now’ by publishing an incorrect, faulty
and fraudulent market share of 23.2% of our channel (the correct share is 38.7%) –
In response to this objection, the advertiser stated that there is no misrepresentation, quite
contrary to the assertion in the Complaint.The CCC observed that the complaint was not valid.
If the advertiser is in principle not permitted to report Ratings as percentages, neither can the
complainant use percentages. The complainant has calculated calculating numbers based on 24-
hour reporting for the period under dispute while the advertiser has focused on a 2-hour time
band. Based on this observation, this complaint was NOT UPHELD.
Objection 5 - RTV has sliced BARC data to achieve its artificial and fraudulent market share
and reduced market share of other channels - Advertiser stated that Republic TV has promoted
it's Single Event performance for the time slot 2100-2300, which is allowed by BARC guidelines.
The CCC observed that the 2-hour period was permissible under Single Event Reporting
guidelines. This complaint was NOT UPHELD.
Objection 6 - RTV has disparaged all channels operational in India, by claiming to create ‘A
New Record In Indian Television’ based on either impermissible and incorrect BARC data
and/or non-substantiation, thereof - In response to this objection, the advertiser stated that the
Single Event promotion is in accordance BARC Guidelines. Based on this response, the CCC
concluded that the Ad - mailer was not disparaging other channels. The claim, “A New Record
In Indian Television”, was considered as a Hyperbole. This complaint was NOT UPHELD.
COMPANY: Puranik Builders Limited
Complaint:
At the behest of SEBI, AMFI has launched a focussed investor education media campaign to
create better awareness among general public about mutual funds under the tag line “Mutual
Funds Sahi Hai” (MFSH) with simple messages and themes. One can invest in mutual funds by
making a lumpsum investment or in small / convenient instalments through Systematic
Investment Plan (SIP). SIP is a convenient investment methodology offered by Mutual Funds
wherein one could invest a specified amount in a mutual fund scheme periodically, at fixed
intervals – say once a month, instead of making a lump-sum investment – just like a bank
recurring deposit.
The concept of SIP has been painstakingly built by the mutual fund industry through continuous
education and awareness initiatives over 2 decades. The common public today understands that
SIP stands for small and regular investments in mutual funds which could help them fulfil their
long term financial goals, including buying house (even though many of them may not know the
full form of SIP !!) In short, SIP has become a popular and ubiquitous mutual fund term which
is understood by investors as well as noninvestors. Against the above backdrop, we would like
to draw your attention to a potentially misleading advertisement issued by Puranik Builders
Limited, a realty company, using the term SIP in the advertisement to promote their realty
projects in Pune. They have also compared a bank-loan EMI with a SIP, which again is an
example used by mutual funds to educate investors on the benefits of investing through the SIP
mode for long term investing. M/s. Puranik Builders have tried to take undue advantage of the
popularity of the term SIP by prominently using the term SIP in the advertisement which could
mis-lead gullible and un-informed individuals to believe that they are investing in a mutual fund
SIP from which they will ultimately acquire a house in Puranik housing project..
CCC RECOMMENDATION: NOT UPHELD
The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the
complainant and forwarded the details of the complaint, verbatim, to the advertiser with a request
to respond to the same. The Advertiser replied seeking a meeting for informal resolution of
complaint. Subsequently, the advertiser and their advertising agency representatives were
offered a personal hearing twice with the ASCI Secretariat, at which time they assured to submit
their detailed response. The advertiser did not provide their specific comments on the complaint
by due date, nor did they fulfil the pre-requisites by confirming compliance by way of appropriate
modification or withdrawal of the objected claim, within the stipulated period. Therefore, the
complaint was processed for CCC deliberations. The CCC viewed the advertiser’s advertisement
and observed that the context of use of the term `SIP’ in the advertisement was very different
than that used by the complainant in their advertisements. The CCC noted that the complainant
cited in the complaint that `Systematic Investment Plan’ (SIP) is a convenient investment
methodology offered by Mutual Funds, whereas the advertiser’s advertisement was for purchase
of homes through `Smart Installment Plan’ (SIP). As per the CCC, there is no ownership of using
the term `SIP’ in the advertisement. Moreover, the advertiser has explained the abbreviation in
the advertisement. Based on this observation, the CCC concluded that the term `SIP’ in the
advertiser’s advertisement was not similar to the complainant’s mutual fund advertisement
campaign, so as to suggest plagiarism, as the term `SIP’ is an acronym which was used in
different context and for different category of services offered. The complaint was NOT
UPHELD.
COMPANY: Touchstone Educationals
Complaint “The advertisement shows students smiling and asking whether the reader wants a 9
Band score in IELTS. It mentions that it is India's no 1 IELTS Institute and asks the readers of
the newspaper to come and join the institute.
It mentions that it is India's no. 1 IELTS Institute although the same has not been substantiated.
It is misleading in nature”
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the
complainant and forwarded the details of the complaint, verbatim, to the advertiser with a request
to respond to the same. The
Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat which they
did not avail, but submitted their written response. The advertiser had stated in their response
that their institute is the first IELTS institute which the Cambridge University press chose as its
official knowledge partner. The said claim is made basis the rewards and recognitions received
by the advertiser from international bodies responsible for conducting the IELTS exam. As claim
support data, the advertiser provided copy of these award certificates.
The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the advertiser’s response. On reviewing
the award certificates, the CCC observed that IDP had awarded the advertiser for being No.1
India Business Partner
2017-18, and BCD had given the certificate for the advertiser’s institute for being Top Partner of
the year 2017-18.
Based on this data, the CCC concluded that the claim, “India's No. 1 IELTS Institute”, was not
substantiated. The claim was misleading by omission of references of it being No.1 India
Business Partner as per IDP as well as the source and year for the same. 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: Mind Tech Management
Complaint “Fraudulent and misleading ad stating that atone regardless of age and qualification
can become a psychological counsellor after 8 days training and secure Govt of India supported
certificate. while the fact is that it takes years of study (graduation/postgraduation/MPhil etc) the
advertisement is totally misleading and is aimed at deceiving and exploiting the naive and gullible
from the weaker sections of the community. Such a false ad when published by a newspaper that
has a credible standing in the community becomes all the more misleading. It is urged ASCI to
set an example by raking strongest possible measures in order to prevent misuse of public media
by unscrupulous ones in the community
The ad claims that they can train anyone regardless of age / qualification as a psychological
counsellor by attending just 8 sessions and award government of India supported certificate and
ID Card whereas it takes years of study leading to graduation/postgraduation/MPhil etc to
become a Counsellor in Psychology. Hence the advertisement under reference is fraudulent and
misleading especially for the naive and gullible and appear to have an ulterior intention of
misguiding and exploiting the weaker section of the community. It becomes all the more
misleading when such an ad is published in an accepted and well known newspaper like
MADHYAMAM. Prelinary informal/formal intimations to the office of MADHYAMAM have
fallen on deaf years and hence this complaint.”
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the
complainant and forwarded the details of the complaint, verbatim, to the advertiser with a request
to respond to the same. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the
ASCI Secretariat which they did not avail, but submitted their written response. The advertiser
had stated in their response that their institute is conducting deep level personality development
programs, and Training programs related to skill development. They are also giving skill
certificates to their students through National Development Agency promoted by Govt. of India.
Upon carefully viewing the print advertisement, examining the complaint, and the response given
by the advertiser, the CCC observed that the advertiser has made only assertions regarding the
courses offered by them. They did not provide supporting evidence of the details of their program
or verifiable details of their students who had completed their Psychiatric Counselling courses
within the time period as claimed, and have become expert Psychiatric Counsellor or had
obtained Govt. of India certificate with ID card.
In the absence of claim support data, the CCC concluded that the claims (in Malayalam) as
translated in English, “People of any age and having any education can study within two months
(8 Saturdays). You can be an efficient expert Psychiatric Counsellor to solve your own mental
issues and others issues. Will get Govt. of India promoted certificate and ID card after the
course.”, was not substantiated and is misleading by exaggeration, and is likely to lead to grave
or widespread disappointment in the minds of consumers. The advertisement contravened
Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1, I.4
and I.5 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.
COMPANY: Times Network (Times Now)
Complaint:
“Channel On Air Promotion of Times Now on 26th July'18.
Times Now has used sliced target group NCCS AB Males 22-50 to calculate relative channel
share which is not permissible by BARC guideline. As well as calculated relative share also
wrong”
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the
complainant and forwarded the details of the complaint, verbatim, to the advertiser with a request
to respond to the same. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the
ASCI Secretariat which they did not avail, but submitted their written response. The advertiser
had stated in their response that there is no restriction in using relative shares, as the leadership
claim is not based on Single Event but previous 4 weeks as mandated by BARC guidelines.
The claim support data was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC viewed the TV
– promo and considered the Advertiser’s response as well as the opinion of Technical expert
presented at the meeting. The CCC observed that the specified BARC source is – BARC/ All
India 1MN+ /NCCS AB Males 22-50
/Wk 24-29’18, 24 hrs/Relative Share. The TV - promo is not for Single Event Reporting but
channel performance for 24 hours across 6 weeks. As the target group NCCS AB Males 22-50
can be directly queried from the BARC system, the CCC did not consider such reference to be
objectionable in the context of the advertisement. This complaint was NOT UPHELD
As for the objection raised against the reference made to relative share, the CCC observed that
publishing of relative shares was not permitted under BARC Usage Guidelines. In this context,
the CCC concluded that 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 Ad – TV promo contravened Chapters I.3 and IV.1(b) of the ASCI Code. This
complaint was UPHELD.
COMPANY: Ayaan Foundation Ayaan Defence Academy
Claim Objected To:
“100% Job otherwise fee return.”
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objections raised in the
complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI
Secretariat. The advertiser had, however, not responded to ASCI’s request. The CCC noted that
no response was received from the advertiser prior to the prescribed due date for this complaint.
The CCC viewed the print advertisement and upon careful consideration of the complaint, and
in the absence of any comments or response from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the
claim of “100% Job” was not substantiated with authentic supporting data such as detailed list of
students who have been placed through their Institute in defence sectors, contact details of
students for verification, enrolment forms and appointment letters received by the students, nor
any independent audit or verification certificate. The claim is misleading by exaggeration and is
likely to lead to grave or widespread disappointment in the minds of consumers. Claim of
“otherwise fee return”, was not substantiated with any supporting evidence of the non-selected
students who were refunded with full paid fees, and is misleading by exaggeration.
The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and
Programs as well as Chapters I.1, I.2, I.4 and I.5 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was
UPHELD.
COMPANY: Hair Dream Center
Claims Objected To:
1. Get rid of baldness
2. Money back guarantee.
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objections raised in the
complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI
Secretariat. The advertiser had, however, not responded to ASCI’s request. The CCC noted that
no response was received from the advertiser prior to the prescribed due date for this complaint.
The CCC viewed the print advertisement and upon careful consideration of the complaint, and
in the absence of any comments or response from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the
claim, “Get rid of baldness”, was not substantiated with supporting evidence and is misleading
by exaggeration and is likely to lead to grave or widespread disappointment in the minds of
consumers. Claim, “Money back guarantee”, was not substantiated by providing details of the
money back package plans and how the entire treatment expenses are refunded. The advertiser
did not provide evidence of the patients who were not benefitted with the treatment, were
refunded with the amount. The claim is misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement
contravened Chapters I.1, I.4 and I.5 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.
COMPANY: Sri Venkateswara Filling Station
PRODUCT: Essar Oil
Claim Objected To: “World No.1 Oil Company”
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI had approached the advertiser (Nayara Energy Ltd) for their response in addressing
the objection raised in the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal
Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat which they did not avail, but replied that they are not the
advertisers of the said advertisement. Subsequently, on ASCI’s request, the concerned media
(Eenadu) provided the name of the Ad. Agency - M/s Organ Ads, who had released the
advertisement, and also provided a copy of the advertisement release order. Upon carefully
viewing the print advertisement, examining the complaint and in the absence of response from
the advertiser / advertising agency, the CCC concluded that the claim, “World No.1 Oil
Company”, was not substantiated with verifiable comparative data of the advertiser and other
similar oil companies worldwide, to prove that it is in leadership position (No.1) than the rest, or
through a third party validation. The claim is misleading by exaggeration. The source for the
claim was not indicated in the advertisement. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and
I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.
COMPANY: Sahu Air Cooler
Claim Objected To: “World No.1”
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in the
complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI
Secretariat. The advertiser had, however, not responded to ASCI’s request. The CCC noted that
no response was received from the advertiser prior to the prescribed due date for this complaint.
The CCC viewed the print advertisement and upon careful consideration of the complaint, and
in the absence of any comments or response from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the
claim, “World No.1”, was not substantiated with any verifiable comparative data for worldwide,
of the advertiser’s product and other competitive air coolers, to prove that it is in leadership
position (No.1) than the rest, or through a third party validation. The source for the claim was not
indicated in the advertisement. The claim is misleading by exaggeration and implication and
likely to lead to grave or widespread disappointment in the minds of consumers. The
advertisement contravened Chapters I.1, I.2, I.4 and I.5 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was
UPHELD.
COMPANY: Skin Technology Clinic
Claim Objected To:
“Successful treatment of baldness”
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in the
complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI
Secretariat. The advertiser had, however, not responded to ASCI’s request. The CCC noted that
no response was received from the advertiser prior to the prescribed due date for this complaint.
The CCC viewed the print advertisement and upon careful consideration of the complaint, and
in the absence of any comments or response from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the
claim, “Successful treatment of baldness”, was not substantiated with supporting evidence or
with treatment efficacy data, and is misleading by exaggeration and is likely to lead to grave or
widespread disappointment in the minds of consumers. The claim implying baldness cure as a
result of the treatment (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. The
advertisement contravened Chapters I.1, I.4, I.5 and III.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was
UPHELD.
COMPANY: Shoolini University
Claim Objected To:
“100% placements from last 3 years.”
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in the
complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI
Secretariat. The advertiser had, however, not responded to ASCI’s request. The CCC noted that
no response was received from the advertiser prior to the prescribed due date for this complaint.
The CCC viewed the TVC and upon careful consideration of the complaint, and in the absence
of any comments or response from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “100%
placements from last 3 years”, was not substantiated with authentic supporting data on year on
year basis for the last 3 years as claimed, giving detailed list of students who have been placed
through their Institute, contact details of students for verification, enrolment forms and
appointment letters received by the students, nor any independent audit or verification certificate.
The claim is misleading by exaggeration and is likely to lead to grave or widespread
disappointment in the minds of consumers. The TVC contravened Guidelines for Advertising of
Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1, I.4 and I.5 of the ASCI Code. The
complaint was UPHELD.
COMPANY: Farouk Educational Trust
PRODUCT: Raak Arts and Science College
Claim Objected To:
“100% placement”
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in the
complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI
Secretariat. The advertiser had, however, not responded to ASCI’s request. The CCC noted that
no response was received from the advertiser prior to the prescribed due date for this complaint.
The CCC viewed the TVC and upon careful consideration of the complaint, and in the absence
of any comments or response from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “100%
placement”, was not substantiated with authentic supporting data giving detailed list of students
who have been placed through their Institute, contact details of students for verification,
enrolment forms and appointment letters received by the students, nor any independent audit or
verification certificate. The claim is misleading by exaggeration and is likely to lead to grave or
widespread disappointment in the minds of consumers. The TVC contravened Guidelines for
Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1, I.4 and I.5 of the
ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.
COMPANY: St. Soldier Institute of International Studies
Claim Objected To:
“The safest and right way to go for Canadian Education”
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in the
complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI
Secretariat. The advertiser had, however, not responded to ASCI’s request. The CCC noted that
no response was received from the advertiser prior to the prescribed due date for this complaint.
The CCC viewed the TVC and observed that the advertiser’s institute is providing Canadian
Pathway Program for students, for career in Canada, with first year course in India and
completion of the course in Canada.
In the absence of any comments or response from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the
claim, “The safest and right way to go for Canadian Education”, was not substantiated with
verifiable supporting data, and is misleading by exaggeration and implication. The claim is likely
to lead to grave or widespread disappointment in the minds of consumers. The TVC contravened
Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1, I.4
and I.5 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.
COMPANY: Jai Hind Group of Institution
Claims Objected To:
1. 100% results since 2006.
2. 100% placements.
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objections raised in the
complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI
Secretariat. The advertiser had, however, not responded to ASCI’s request. The CCC noted that
no response was received from the advertiser prior to the prescribed due date for this complaint.
The CCC viewed the TVC and observed that the advertiser did not provide supporting evidence
of their institute having achieved 100% results on year on year basis since 2006. In the absence
of any comments or response from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “100%
results since 2006”, was not substantiated with verifiable supporting data or through a third party
validation.
Claim, “100% Placements” was not substantiated with authentic supporting data such as detailed
list of students who have been placed through their Institute, contact details of students for
verification, enrolment forms and appointment letters received by the students, nor any
independent audit or verification certificate. The claims are misleading by exaggeration and are
likely to lead to grave or widespread disappointment in the minds of consumers. The TVC
contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as
Chapters I.1, I.4 and I.5 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.
COMPANY: Times Internet Limited (Gaana.com)
Claim Objected To:
“India’s favorite music app.”
(Source of claim not mentioned.)
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI approached the advertiser in addressing the objection raised in the complaint. The
Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The
advertiser had, however, not responded to ASCI’s request. The CCC noted that no response was
received from the advertiser prior to the prescribed due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed
the TVC and upon careful consideration of the complaint, and in the absence of any comments
or response from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “India’s Favorite Music App”,
was not substantiated with subscriber data or a market research data of the advertiser’s music app
against all other competitive music apps, and is misleading by exaggeration and implication. The
TVC contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.
COMPANY: Vedanta Academy IAS
Claim Objected To:
“India s No. 1 Institute for UPSC Exams.”
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in the
complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI
Secretariat. The advertiser had, however, not responded to ASCI’s request. The CCC noted that
no response was received from the advertiser prior to the prescribed due date for this complaint.
The CCC viewed the TVC and upon careful consideration of the complaint, and in the absence
of any comments or response from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “India s No.
1 Institute for UPSC Exams”, was not substantiated with any verifiable comparative data of the
advertiser’s institute and other similar institutes to prove that it is in leadership position (No.1)
than the rest, or through a third party validation. The claim is misleading by exaggeration and is
likely to lead to grave or widespread disappointment in the minds of consumers.
The TVC contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as
well as Chapters I.1, I.4 and I.5 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.
COMPANY: N Rangarao and Sons
PRODUCT: Vasu 100
Claim Objected To:
“Not only country’s but World’s No. 1”
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in
the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI
Secretariat which they did not avail, but replied requesting for an extension to submit their
response. The advertiser was granted an extension of three days to the standard lead time of
seven days to submit their reply in response to their request for this extension. Advertiser in their
response stated that the claim made was basis an independent research/assessment conducted by
Nielsen for top three brands of agarbathis. The results showed that `Cycle’ brand was the largest
selling brand amongst the other three brands.
As claim support data, the advertiser provided a copy of the said Nielsen report. For claim of
“World’s No.1”, the advertiser stated that they had assumed that they are the World's largest
agarbathi marketers based on various trade level interactions they had with similar manufacturers
of incense in other countries. The CCC viewed the TVC and considered the advertiser’s response.
The CCC observed that the Nielsen data showed that Cycle brand had a 14.2% share in terms of
value when considering the 12 month period ending June 2018, which was higher than 8.8% for
the nearest competitor. This data proved that Cycle Pure agarbathi was India’s No.1 in agarbathi
segment. This complaint was NOT UPHELD.
However, the advertiser did not provide any authentic verifiable data to prove that the product is
No.1 in the world. In the absence of this data, the CCC concluded that the voice over in the TVC
claiming Cycle Pure agarbathi to be “World’s No.1”, was not substantiated with comparative
data of the advertiser’s product and other agarbathi brands worldwide, or through a third party
validation, and is misleading by exaggeration. The TVC contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the
ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.
COMPANY: Prashanth Fertility Research Centre
Claims Objected To:
1. Are Continuous IUI and IVF Failures, Making your lose hope - we make your baby
dreams true.
2. Ranked No.1 Fertility Centre in Chennai.
Objection-
The mentioned claim in the advertisement implies guaranteed cure.
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objections raised in
the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI
Secretariat which they did not avail, but submitted their written response. Advertiser stated in
their response that the claim of “…We make baby dreams come true”, is a tag line and does not
guarantee results. Further, Times of India has ranked their clinic as No.1 in Chennai. As claim
support data, the advertiser provided a copy of `All India Fertility & IVF Ranking Survey 2018’.
Upon carefully viewing the print advertisement, examining the complaint and the response with
the supporting data given by the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “Are Continuous
IUI and IVF Failures, Making your lose hope - we make your baby dreams true”, implies
guaranteed cure for infertility, which was not substantiated with supporting evidence. The claim
is misleading by implication and is likely to lead to grave or widespread disappointment in the
minds of consumers. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1, I.4 and I.5 of the ASCI Code.
Further, on reviewing the ranking survey data, the CCC observed that the advertiser’s clinic
featured as Rank 1 listed under `Single Speciality Hospitals & Clinics of Chennai’. Based on
this data, the CCC concluded that the claim, “Ranked No.1 Fertility Centre in Chennai”, was not
objectionable. However, the source for the claim was not indicated in the advertisement. The
advertisement contravened Chapter 1.2 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.
COMPANY: Kolors Health Care India Pvt. Ltd
PRODUCT: Kolors Slimming & Beauty
Claim Objected To:
“Reduce belly, sides, thighs, hips in short period of time up to 6 inches without exercise, pills,
side effects and surgery.”
Objection-
The visuals in the advertisement appear to be misleading.
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in the
complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI
Secretariat. The advertiser had, however, not responded to ASCI’s request. The CCC noted that
no response was received from the advertiser prior to the prescribed due date for this complaint.
Advertiser did not provide details of the treatment procedure for weight reduction, nor any weight
loss data based on rigorous trial on statistically significant number of patients. The CCC viewed
the print advertisement and upon careful consideration of the complaint, and in the absence of
any comments or response from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims, “Reduce
belly, sides, thighs, hips in short period of time up to 6 inches without exercise, pills, side effects
and surgery”, were not substantiated with supporting clinical evidence, and with treatment
efficacy data, and are misleading by exaggeration. The images shown of a woman before and
after the treatment imply a significant weight loss which is also misleading, and is likely to lead
to grave or widespread disappointment in the minds of consumers. The advertisement
contravened Chapters I.1, I.4 and I.5 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.
COMPANY: Marwadi Education Foundation - Marwadi University
Claim Objected To:
“University”
CCC RECOMMENDATION: NOT UPHELD
The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in the
complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI
Secretariat. The advertiser had, however, not responded to ASCI’s request. The CCC noted that
no response was received from the advertiser prior to the prescribed due date for this complaint.
The CCC referred to the University Grants Commission website
(https://www.ugc.ac.in/oldpdf/Consolidated%20list%20of%20All%20Universities.pdf)
wherein Marwadi University was listed at number 154 among various other Universities. The
complaint was NOT UPHELD.
COMPANY: Kolors Health Care India Pvt. Ltd
PRODUCT: Kolors Slimming & Beauty
Claim Objected To:
“Celebrity Rambha Reduced 15 Kgs in Just Few Months”
Objection- Advertisement is in potential violation of celebrity guidelines
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objections raised in the
complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI
Secretariat. The advertiser had, however, not responded to ASCI’s request. The CCC noted that
no response was received from the advertiser prior to the prescribed due date for this complaint.
The CCC viewed the print advertisement and upon careful consideration of the complaint, and
in the absence of any comments or response from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the
claim, “Celebrity Rambha Reduced 15 Kgs in Just Few Months”, was not substantiated with
supporting clinical evidence for the weight loss achieved by Rambha due to advertised product /
service. The claim is misleading by exaggeration, and is likely to lead to grave or widespread
disappointment in the minds of consumers.
The advertiser did not provide any evidence to show that the celebrity had done due diligence
prior to endorsement, nor any Testimonials Celebrity was provided.
The advertisement contravened Chapter I.1, I.4, I.5 of the ASCI Code and Clauses (c) and (d) of
the ASCI Guidelines for Celebrities in Advertising. The complaint was UPHELD.
COMPANY: Sarkar Dispensary
Claims Objected To:
1. Best Ayurvedic Clinic.
2. Internationally Awarded.
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objections raised in the
complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI
Secretariat. The advertiser had, however, not responded to ASCI’s request. The CCC noted that
no response was received from the advertiser prior to the prescribed due date for this complaint.
The CCC viewed the print advertisement and upon careful consideration of the complaint, and
in the absence of any comments or response from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the
claims, “Best Ayurvedic Clinic” and “Internationally Awarded”, were not substantiated with
copy of the award certificate, details of the criteria for granting the award, references of the award
received such as the year, source and category, references of the awarding body, its authenticity
and credibility etc. Claims are misleading by omission of disclaimer to qualify these claims and
is likely to lead to grave or widespread disappointment in the minds of consumers. The
advertisement contravened Chapters I.1, I.2, I.4 and I.5 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was
UPHELD.
COMPANY: OPTM HealthCare Private Limited
Claims Objected To:
1. Get back healthy knees without operation, knee cap or Painkiller
2. Rapidly effective in comparison with other traditional treatments or products
including chondroitin. 100000+ Surgery prevented.
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objections raised in the
complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI
Secretariat. The advertiser had, however, not responded to ASCI’s request. The CCC noted that
no response was received from the advertiser prior to the prescribed due date for this complaint.
The CCC viewed the advertisement and upon careful consideration of the complaint, and in the
absence of any comments or response from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims,
“Get back healthy knees without operation, knee cap or Painkiller”, and “Rapidly effective in
comparison with other traditional treatments or products including chondroitin”, were not
substantiated with scientific rationale or clinical evidence of “Phytotherapy” treatment efficacy
over traditional therapy. The advertiser did not provide any details of the products being used
under their phytotherapy, their composition and regulatory approvals etc.
Claim, “100000+ Surgery prevented”, was not substantiated with supporting evidence of the
patients suffering from knee problems who were advised knee surgery, successfully treated by
the advertiser’s phytotherapy so as to avoid surgery. The claims in the advertisement are
misleading by gross exaggeration and are likely to lead to grave or widespread disappointment
in the minds of consumers. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1, I.4 and I.5 of the ASCI
Code. The complaint was UPHELD.
COMPANY: Poddar Management Technical Campus
Claim Objected To:
“100% Placement Assistance.”
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in
the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI
Secretariat which they did not avail, but submitted their written response. The advertiser had
stated in their response that they have a placement cell which provides training
lectures/sessions/workshops round the year to help the students to pass the job interviews, and
they also organise job fairs and campus drives round the year for suitable job openings for
students. As claim support data, the advertiser provided Training certificates of students, List of
students with companies name in which they were placed, and photographs of their Training
Sessions, Recruitment Drives organised by the advertiser’s institute. The CCC viewed the print
advertisement and upon careful consideration of the complaint, and the response given by the
advertiser, the CCC concluded that while the advertiser may be providing placement assistance
to their students, the use of 100% numerical is not relevant for “Placement Assistance” claim.
The use of “100%” as a descriptor in the claim is misleading by implication and is likely to lead
to grave or widespread disappointment in the minds of consumers. The advertisement
contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as
Chapters I.4 and I.5 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.
COMPANY: Institute of Advanced Mgt & Research (IAMR)
Claim Objected To: “100% Placement Assistance”
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in the
complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI
Secretariat. The advertiser had, however, not responded to ASCI’s request. The CCC noted that
no response was received from the advertiser prior to the prescribed due date for this complaint.
The CCC viewed the print advertisement and upon careful consideration of the complaint, and
in the absence of any comments or response from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that while
the advertiser may be providing placement assistance to their students, the use of 100% numerical
is not relevant for “Placement Assistance” claim. The use of “100%” as a descriptor in the claim
is misleading by implication and is likely to lead to grave or widespread disappointment in the
minds of consumers. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational
Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.4 and I.5 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was
UPHELD.
COMPANY: Indirapuram Institute of Higher Studies
Claim Objected To:
“100% Assured & Guaranteed Placement Assistance”
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in the
complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI
Secretariat. The advertiser had, however, not responded to ASCI’s request. The CCC noted that
no response was received from the advertiser prior to the prescribed due date for this complaint.
The CCC viewed the print advertisement and upon careful consideration of the complaint, and
in the absence of any comments or response from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that while
the advertiser may be providing placement assistance to their students, the use of 100% numerical
is not relevant for “Placement Assistance” claim. The use of “100%” as a descriptor in the claim
of “100% Assured & Guaranteed Placement Assistance”, is misleading by implication and is
likely to lead to grave or widespread disappointment in the minds of consumers. The
advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs
as well as Chapters I.4 and I.5 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.
COMPANY: Indus School of Business Mgt. (Gurgaon)
Claim Objected To: “100% Placement Assurance”
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in the
complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI
Secretariat. The advertiser had, however, not responded to ASCI’s request. The CCC noted that
no response was received from the advertiser prior to the prescribed due date for this complaint.
The CCC viewed the print advertisement and upon careful consideration of the complaint, and
in the absence of any comments or response from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the
claim, “100% Placement assurance”, was not substantiated with supporting data, and is
misleading by implication and exaggeration. The claim is likely to lead to grave or widespread
disappointment in the minds of consumers. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for
Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1, I.4 and I.5 of the
ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.
COMPANY: Chathamkulam Foundation Charitable Trust
PRODUCT: Chathamkulam Inst of Research & Advanced Studies
Claim Objected To: “100% Placement Assistance”
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in the
complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI
Secretariat. The advertiser had, however, not responded to ASCI’s request. The CCC noted that
no response was received from the advertiser prior to the prescribed due date for this complaint.
The CCC viewed the print advertisement and upon careful consideration of the complaint, and
in the absence of any comments or response from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that while
the advertiser may be providing placement assistance to their students, the use of 100% numerical
is not relevant for “Placement Assistance” claim. The use of “100%” as a descriptor in the claim
is misleading by implication and is likely to lead to grave or widespread disappointment in the
minds of consumers. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational
Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.4 and I.5 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was
UPHELD.
COMPANY: T. M. Bhagalpur University
Claim Objected To: “100% Placement Assistance”
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in the
complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI
Secretariat. The advertiser had, however, not responded to ASCI’s request. The CCC noted that
no response was received from the advertiser prior to the prescribed due date for this complaint.
The CCC viewed the print advertisement and upon careful consideration of the complaint, and
in the absence of any comments or response from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that while
the advertiser may be providing placement assistance to their students, the use of 100% numerical
is not relevant for “Placement Assistance” claim. The use of “100%” as a descriptor in the claim
is misleading by implication and is likely to lead to grave or widespread disappointment in the
minds of consumers. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational
Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.4 and I.5 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was
UPHELD.
COMPANY: Mar Athanasios College for Advanced Studies (MACFAST)
Claim Objected To:
“100% Placement Cell Assistance”
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in the
complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI
Secretariat. The advertiser had, however, not responded to ASCI’s request. The CCC noted that
no response was received from the advertiser prior to the prescribed due date for this complaint.
The CCC viewed the print advertisement and upon careful consideration of the complaint, and
in the absence of any comments or response from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that while
the advertiser may have a placement cell and may be providing placement assistance to their
students, the use of 100% numerical is not relevant for “Placement Cell Assistance” claim. The
use of “100%” as a descriptor in the claim is misleading by implication and is likely to lead to
grave or widespread disappointment in the minds of consumers. The advertisement contravened
Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.4 and
I.5 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.
COMPANY: International School of Management (ISM Patna)
Claim objected to:
“100% Placement Assistance”
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in the
complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI
Secretariat. The advertiser had, however, not responded to ASCI’s request. The CCC noted that
no response was received from the advertiser prior to the prescribed due date for this complaint.
The CCC viewed the print advertisement and upon careful consideration of the complaint, and
in the absence of any comments or response from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that while
the advertiser may be providing placement assistance to their students, the use of 100% numerical
is not relevant for “Placement Assistance” claim. The use of “100%” as a descriptor in the claim
is misleading by implication and is likely to lead to grave or widespread disappointment in the
minds of consumers. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational
Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.4 and I.5 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was
UPHELD.
COMPANY: Netaji Subhas Institute of Business Management
Claim Objected To:
“100% Placement Assistance.”
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in
the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI
Secretariat which they did not avail, but submitted their written response. The advertiser had
stated in their response that their institute puts 100% efforts in assisting their students to get jobs
through the campus placement drive by inviting Companies for Recruitments.
The CCC viewed the print advertisement and upon careful consideration of the complaint, and
the response given by the advertiser, the CCC concluded that while the advertiser may be
providing placement assistance to their students, the use of 100% numerical is not relevant for
“Placement Assistance” claim. The use of “100%” as a descriptor in the claim is misleading
by implication and is likely to lead to grave or widespread disappointment in the minds of
consumers. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational
Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.4 and I.5 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was
UPHELD.
COMPANY: Christ Institute of Management (CIM)
Claim Objected To:
“100% Placement Assistance”
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in the
complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI
Secretariat. The advertiser had, however, not responded to ASCI’s request. The CCC noted that
no response was received from the advertiser prior to the prescribed due date for this complaint.
The CCC viewed the print advertisement and upon careful consideration of the complaint, and
in the absence of any comments or response from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that while
the advertiser may be providing placement assistance to their students, the use of 100% numerical
is not relevant for “Placement Assistance” claim. The use of “100%” as a descriptor in the claim
is misleading by implication and is likely to lead to grave or widespread disappointment in the
minds of consumers. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational
Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.4 and I.5 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was
UPHELD.
COMPANY: KV Charitable Trust
PRODUCT: KVIM Business School
Claim Objected To:
“100% Placement Record (Since Inception)”
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in
the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI
Secretariat which they did not avail, but submitted their written response post the due date. The
advertiser stated in their response that since the Inception of their institute in 2009, they had 8
batches of students graduated till 2018. In 2011 and 2012 there were 60 students per batch, and
from thereon were 120 students per batch. The students who had opted for placement through
their institute had received one or more offers for placement. As claim support data, the advertiser
provided a batchwise summary list for 2009-2011, 2010-2012, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015,
and 2016, giving the registration number of students, students name, and names of companies in
which they were placed. Upon carefully viewing the print advertisement, examining the
complaint and the response given by the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “100%
Placement Record (Since Inception)”, was inadequately substantiated on year on year basis since
inception, with authentic verifiable supporting data admission records / enrolment forms of their
students, contact details of students for verification, and appointment letters received by the
students, nor any independent audit or verification certificate. The claim is misleading by
exaggeration and is likely to lead to grave or widespread disappointment in the minds of
consumers. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational
Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1, I.4 and I.5 of the ASCI Code. The complaint
was UPHELD.
COMPANY: EMPI Business School
Claim Objected To:
“Get Work Permit To Work In Canada After Course Completion”
(The above claim implies 100% Placement)
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in the
complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI
Secretariat. The advertiser had, however, not responded to ASCI’s request. The CCC noted that
no response was received from the advertiser prior to the prescribed due date for this complaint.
The CCC viewed the print advertisement and observed that the advertiser did not provide
supporting evidence of students who had received job offers in Canada after completion of their
courses, and the companies in which they were placed. In the absence of any comments or
response from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “Get Work Permit To Work In
Canada After Course Completion”, was not substantiated. The claim implies guaranteed
placement in Canada, which is misleading by implication and is likely to lead to grave or
widespread disappointment in the minds of consumers. The advertisement contravened
Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1, I.4
and I.5 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.
COMPANY: Harlal Institute of Management &Technology
Claim Objected To:
“100% Placements since last 20 years”
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in the
complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI
Secretariat. The advertiser had, however, not responded to ASCI’s request. The CCC noted that
no response was received from the advertiser prior to the prescribed due date for this complaint.
The CCC viewed the print advertisement and upon careful consideration of the complaint, and
in the absence of any comments or response from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the
claim, “100% Placement since last 20 years”, was not substantiated on year on year basis since
last 20 years, with authentic supporting data such as detailed list of students who have been placed
through their Institute, contact details of students for verification, enrolment forms and
appointment letters received by the students, nor any independent audit or verification certificate.
The claim is misleading by exaggeration and is likely to lead to grave or widespread
disappointment in the minds of consumers. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for
Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1, I.4 and I.5 of the
ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.
COMPANY: Indian Institute of Finance
Claim Objected To:
“100% Placement track record”
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in
the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI
Secretariat which they did not avail, but submitted their written response post the due date. The
advertiser stated in their response that the claim made is based upon the placement record of their
past students. Advertiser did not provide any supporting data for the claim made.
Upon carefully viewing the print advertisement, examining the complaint and the response given
by the advertiser, and in the absence of claim support data, the CCC concluded that the claim,
“100% Placement track 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. The claim is misleading by exaggeration and is likely
to lead to grave or widespread disappointment in the minds of consumers. The advertisement
contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as
Chapters I.1, I.4 and I.5 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.
COMPANY: LG Electronics India Pvt. Ltd
PRODUCT: LG Refrigerator
Claims Objected to:
1. Linear Cooling
2. Keeps food fresh up to 14 days
Complaint:
Objections:
1. Please substantiate claims 1 and 2 with claim support data. The claim support data should not
be internal or based on studies commissioned by LG Electronic India Pvt. Ltd.
2. Is the technology mentioned unique to this product?
3. A disclaimer appears which is hardly readable. This violates the ASCI Guidelines for
Disclaimers.
According to us, the advertisement contravenes Chapter 1.1 and 1.4 of ASCI code and the ASCI
Guidelines for Disclaimers. Action to be taken: We propose that the advertisement should be
immediately withdrawn.
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the
complainant and forwarded the details of the complaint, verbatim, to the advertiser with a request
to respond to the same. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the
ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser had, however, not responded to ASCI’s request. The CCC noted
that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the prescribed due date for this
complaint. The CCC viewed the TVC and upon careful consideration of the complaint, and in
the absence of any comments or response from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim,
“Linear Cooling” was not substantiated with technical data for product feature claiming to offer
cooling all across the refrigerator. Claim, “Keeps food fresh up to 14 days”, was not substantiated
with comparative data or with technical tests reports for the product. The claims are misleading
by exaggeration. The TVC contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code.
The CCC observed that the hold duration and legibility of disclaimers in the TVC were not in
compliance in ASCI Guidelines for Disclaimers. The TVC contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of
the ASCI Code, and Clauses 4 (VII) (X) of ASCI Guidelines for Disclaimers. The complaint
was UPHELD.
COMPANY: Institute of Management Studies
Claim Objected To:
“100% Placement”
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in
the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI
Secretariat which they did not avail, but submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the
advertisement and considered the advertiser’s response. The advertiser stated in their response
that their Institute gives unlimited chances to their students for interviews, till they are selected
for placements. In the context of this assistance provided by the advertiser, the CCC concluded
that the claim, “100% Placement” implying guaranteed placement, was false, misleading and is
likely to lead to grave or widespread disappointment in the minds of consumers. The
advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs
as well as Chapters I.1, I.4 and I.5 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. The CCC
observed that the advertiser provided a copy of the modified advertisement wherein the objected
claim was revised to mention “100% placement assistance”. As per the CCC, this revised claim
was not in compliance with Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs
as well as the ASCI Code, as the use of 100% numerical is not relevant for “Placement
Assistance” claim which is misleading by implication.
COMPANY: Institute of Management Studies
Claims Objected To:
1. Consistent 100% Placements Since Inception
2. 100% Placements
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objections raised in
the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI
Secretariat which they did not avail, but submitted their written response. The advertiser replied
that the claims made in the advertisement are factual. As claim support data, the advertiser
provided a summary list of Placement Details for 2016-2018 Batch giving details of 286 students
– their names, roll numbers, number of offers received, and the names of companies where they
were placed. Upon carefully viewing the print advertisement, examining the complaint and the
response with the supporting data given by the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims,
“Consistent 100% Placements Since Inception” and “100% Placement”, were inadequately
substantiated on year on year basis since inception, with authentic supporting data such as
detailed list of students who have been placed through their Institute, contact details of students
for verification, enrolment forms and appointment letters received by the students, nor any
independent audit or verification certificate. The claims are misleading by exaggeration and are
likely to lead to grave or widespread disappointment in the minds of consumers. The
advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs
as well as Chapters I.1, I.4 and I.5 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.
COMPANY: Godrej Consumer Products Ltd
PRODUCT: Godrej No.1 Lemon and Aloe Vera Soap
Claims Objected To:
1. Glowing skin despite the sun and heat
2. 3/4 natural ingredients and extracts of Lemon and Aloe Vera
3. The biggest soap- Godrej No. 1 for Rs. 10
Complaint:
Description:
The ad begins with a husband (Amit Sadh) promising his wife (Sanjeeda Sheikh) to do everything
if she will tell him the secret of her glowing skin despite the sun and heat (Dries clothes, gets
grocery). The wife eventually shows him Godrej No. 1 lemon and aloe vera soap pack. Visual of
the wife bathing with Godrej No. 1 soap appears with a tagline and voiceover which say, “With
3/4 natural ingredients and extracts of Lemon and Aloe Vera.” A footnote states “Godrej No.1
with lemon and aloe vera has 76% fatty matter”. The wife then goes on to say “The biggest soap
for Rs 10 is Godrej No. 1” A disclaimer appears- “As compared to 5 biggest brands in the
country.” The ad ends with the Godrej No.1 jingle- “De No.1 Nikhaar Our objections:
1. Please substantiate claims 1 to 3 with claim support data. The claim support data should
not be internal or based on studies commissioned by Godrej Consumer Products Ltd.
2. Reference to claim 2; is the amount of ingredients significant to make an impact on the
performance of the product as claimed? Is the efficacy data specific to the benefits of
the formulation attributable to the claimed ingredients provided? Can the advertiser
establish the relationship between the claims and the lemon and aloe vera in the soap?
3. Reference to claim 2; can the advertiser prove that the product as sold in its present form
has the effectiveness of each and all of the ingredients as is being claimed in the
advertisement since the ingredients appear to have symbolic presence in the product?
4. The claim of a glowing skin despite sun and heat because of the ¾ natural ingredients
and lemon and aloe vera extracts cannot be considered “GENERIC” to the product. If
the advertiser is unable to establish the connection between the ingredients and the
claim, the advertisement is false and misleading.
5. Reference to claim 3; a disclaimer appears along with the claim saying, “As compared
to 5 biggest brands in the country.” Please substantiate the same with independent study
data.
6. Actress Sanjeeda Sheikh and Actor Amit Sadh feature in the advertisement. As per the
ASCI Guidelines for Celebrities in Advertising, a Celebrity should do due diligence to
ensure that all description, claims and comparisons made in the advertisements they
appear in or endorse are capable of being objectively ascertained and capable of
substantiation and should not mislead or appear deceptive. The claims made by the
celebrities (Sanjeeda Sheikh and Amit Sadh) in this advertisement violate this clause of
the ASCI guidelines.
According to us, the advertisement contravenes Chapter 1.1, 1.2 and 1.4 of the ASCI Code and
the ASCI Guidelines for Celebrities in Advertising. Action to be taken: We propose that the
advertisement should be immediately withdrawn.
CCC RECOMMENDATION: NOT UPHELD
The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the
complainant and forwarded the details of the complaint, verbatim, to the advertiser with a request
to respond to the same. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the
ASCI Secretariat which they availed via telecon, and subsequently submitted their written
response. The CCC viewed the TVC and considered the advertiser’s response.
Claim – “Glowing skin despite the sun and heat” – Advertiser stated that it is widely accepted
that a soap is useful to clean the human body. The said fact is such an undoubtedly proven fact
that it needs no independent substantiation. When dirty, dusty or oily body is cleansed with soap,
it certainly gives a refreshing, shiny look and feel. The same fact is expressed in an artistic manner
in the said Advertisement.
The CCC concluded that the claim, “Itni garmi, itni dhoop, phir bhi nikhra hai tumhara roop”
was not in contravention of the ASCI code.
Claim – “3/4 natural ingredients and extracts of Lemon and Aloe Vera” – In response to this
objection, the advertiser stated that the TVC quantifies the lime, aloe vera and natural ingredients
in a collective manner and the glow in spite of sun and heat is nowhere attributed solely to aloe
vera and lemon extract. As claim support data, the advertiser provided a copy of the Product
analysis to support that 100% blend composition of TFM for their Grade 1 soap which is derived
from various vegetable oils, is essentially made of 3/4th natural ingredients. Based on the
advertiser’s response, the CCC did not consider the claim, “Godrej No.1 mein hai ¾ prakritik
tatva… aur aloe vera… nimbu.” to be objectionable.
Claim – “The biggest soap- Godrej No. 1 for Rs. 10” – Advertiser stated that the said claim is
based on comparison with top 5 brands of the country. Advertiser in their response provided
weightage of top 5 soap brands, and their cost. Advertiser also provided product packs of these
soaps for verification. From this data, it was evident that Godrej No.1 (63gm) was the biggest
soap available in the market for Rs. 10/-. Based on this assessment, the CCC concluded that the
claim, “10 rupaye mein sabse bada saabun Godrej No.1.”, was substantiated.
The complaint regarding endorsement by the Celebrity was examined by the CCC. It was seen
that the advertisement shows photographs of Actress Sanjeeda Sheikh and Actor Amit Sadh, who
were not considered to be persons likely to have a huge influence on public for product purchase
decision. The complaint was NOT UPHELD.
COMPANY: Pan Parag India Ltd
PRODUCT: Pan Parag Pan Masala
Claim Objected To:
“World’s most popular pan masala.” (Disclaimer’s not in Hindi.)
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in
the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI
Secretariat which they did not avail, but submitted their written response through their advocates.
The advocate on behalf of the advertiser responded that the product Pan Parag Pan Masala is very
popular and unparalleled among its customers all over the world due to its unique quality and
reach. The brand has also received several popular awards like FMCG Award for the year 2003
and 2004 for the continuous faith of its valued consumers, and customer satisfaction in India and
also in other countries.
Advertiser provided a copy of FSSAI license and copy of front panel of different variants of the
products.
Upon carefully viewing the print advertisement, examining the complaint, and the response given
by the advertiser, the CCC observed that the advocate’s response has only assertions about their
product. In the absence of claim support data, the CCC concluded that the claim, “World’s most
popular pan masala”, was not substantiated with any worldwide consumer survey data or any
verifiable comparative data of the advertiser’s product and other pan masala products, to prove
that their product is the most popular among all, or through a third party validation. The claim is
misleading by exaggeration and is likely to lead to grave or widespread disappointment in the
minds of consumers. The advertisement contravened the Chapters I.1, I.4 and I.5 of the ASCI
Code. The CCC also observed that the disclaimers in the advertisement were not legible and also
not in the same language as the body copy of the advertisement (Hindi). The advertisement
contravened Clauses 4 (I) and (VII) of ASCI Guidelines for Disclaimers. The complaint was
UPHELD.
COMPANY: Green Roots Pvt Ltd (Eat Organic the Organic Food Store)
Claims Objected To:
1. Organic food is healthier - Builds strong immune system and protects from heart disease &
cancer as it contains phenolic compounds.
2. Organic vegetables & fruits are more nutritional as they are grown without chemical inputs.
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objections raised in
the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI
Secretariat which they did not avail, but submitted their written response. The advertiser had
stated in their response that the content for the advertisement was taken from a Website article
on the top eight benefits of Organic Food for human body. The CCC viewed the print
advertisement and upon careful consideration of the complaint, and in the absence of any specific
comments with claim support data from the advertiser, observed that the basis for the claims was
only an article on the internet. There were no authentic, published scientific references to support
the claims. The CCC concluded that there is no evidence to suggest that organic food is
nutritionally better than conventional - the only difference being that there are less chances of
contamination of pesticides etc. Based on this assessment, the CCC concluded that the claims,
“Organic food is healthier which builds strong immune system and protects from heart disease
& cancer as it contains phenolic compounds”, and “Organic vegetables & fruits are more
nutritional as they are grown without chemical inputs”, were not adequately substantiated with
any technical data, and are misleading by ambiguity. The advertisement contravened Chapters
I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.
COMPANY: Pernod Ricard India
PRODUCT: Royal Stag
Complaint:
“The ad shows Ranveer Singh coping up with various mental and physical hardships in order to
become the successful star that he is today.
The Brand aims to promote Music CDs although there seems to be no co-relation between the
success of the star and Music CDs as shown in the advertisement. The tagline "It's your life,
MAKE IT LARGE" can have various meanings that can also be used to promote other
commodities indirectly that Royal Stag provides the market with which includes alcohol.”
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the
complainant and forwarded the details of the complaint, verbatim, to the advertiser with a request
to respond to the same. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the
ASCI Secretariat which they did not avail, but submitted their written response. The advertiser
had stated in their response that the basis and underlying idea of the advertisement is independent
of any alcoholic beverages, and is related to Music Compact Discs under the brand name “Royal
Stag Mega Music” which has been used continuously since 2004. The tagline “It’s your Life,
Make it Large” in the TVC does not promote or illustrate alcohol as a product. As claim support
data, the advertiser provided copies of Trademark registration certificates, registrations for Royal
Stag with respect to Music CDs (class 9) and Cricket Gear (classes 25 and 28), and List of retail
outlets selling “Royal Stag Mega Music” Music CDs along with photographs of “Royal Stag
Mega Music” CD. The CCC viewed the YouTube advertisement and considered the advertiser’s
response. The CCC observed that the Advertiser did not provide the annual market sales data of
the product/service advertised. Based on the reference to Music CDs, the CCC concluded that
the advertisement depicting the Royal Stag brand name is a surrogate advertisement for
promotion of a liquor product – Seagram’s Royal Stag. The YouTube advertisement is
misleading by implication, and has reference to the words “It’s your life. Make it Large” 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.”) Furthermore, the advertisement 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 complaint was UPHELD.
The following advertisement was considered to be, prima facie, in violation of The Drugs & Magic
Remedies Act / The Drugs & Cosmetics Rules, and are being referred to the Ministry of AYUSH:-
Sr. No Advertiser (Brand / Product)
Claims Objected to Remarks (Clause Applicable)
1. Shree
Dhanvantri
Herbals - Swing Forte
Capsule
Improves arousal and stamina in sexual disorders.
The maintenance or improvement of
the capacity of human
beings for sexual
pleasure. Section 3(b) -
DMR Schedule
COMPANY: Stitchman – Ret Jack
PRODUCT: Sewing machine
Claim Objected To:
“China’s No. 1.”
CCC RECOMMENDATION RE-EXAMINATION: UPHELD
The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in
the complaint. 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, the advertiser replied that they are the
authorized agent of Jack Sewing machine, China, and they have been advised by their principal
Jack to use the claim of “China No1” in the marketing of their product. Subsequently, the
Advertiser was granted an extension of 20 days to the standard lead time of seven days to submit
their reply in response to their request for this extension. Advertiser in their response for
reexamination stated that Jack was ranked as No.1 sewing machine in China light industry by the
China National Light Industry Council, for their total sales in 2017.
As claim support data, the advertiser provided copies of the above certificates, and photographs
of the exhibition conducted by Jack in various nations wherein they displayed their product
claiming it to be “China’s No.1”.
The CCC viewed the advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response for re-examination.
The CCC observed that there is a mismatch of the text used in the certificate versus the claim
made in the advertisement. The certificate of June 2018 stated that the advertiser ranked “No.1
in top 30 enterprise in China Light Industry Equipment Manufacturing”. Based on this
observation, the CCC concluded that the claim, “China’s No.1” was misleading by ambiguity
and omission of mention of the specific category. The claim was also not qualified to mention
the source for the same. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.2 and I.4 of the ASCI Code.
The complaint stands Upheld on Re-examination.
COMPANY: Shopkio
Complaint:
“It’s a saree advertisement, seeing which I have ordered a saree for mother,
https://www.shopkio.com/productdetail/attractiveblue- colored-printed-khadi-silk-saree-
onlineshopkio/ 899. I have been misled by shopkio against the order of saree which i am taking
it as a humiliation of consumer i am feeling very distressed now because of company reaction in
my case is very lethargic hence I seek your intervention & support to bring the matter into
conclusion & help me to get the right saree which is still available on website. Now i felt trapped
& shopkio has challenged my sense of vision & understanding to judge the product. Appreciate
your prompt reply & support on this.”
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the
complainant and forwarded the details of the complaint, verbatim, to the advertiser with a request
to respond to the same. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the
ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser had, however, not responded to ASCI’s request. The CCC noted
that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the prescribed due date for this
complaint. Complainant provided picture of the advertised product (Saree) displayed online and
the product actually delivered to him, and copy of correspondence exchanged with the advertiser.
The CCC observed that the advertiser in his communication with the complainant had admitted
that there could be a slight difference in color between the picture of the product model shown
and the actual product due to the light of the camera.
The CCC viewed the website advertisement, the photograph of the actual product received by the
complainant, and based on the evidence provided of the advertiser agreeing to image editing, the
CCC concluded that the website advertisement offer of “Attractive Blue Colored Printed Khadi
Silk Saree Online”, with the visual of the model shown with the same colour saree, was false,
misleading by distortion, and misrepresentation of facts. The advertisement is likely to lead to
grave or widespread disappointment in the minds of consumers.
The website advertisement contravened Chapters I.1, I.4 and I.5 of the ASCI Code. The
complaint was UPHELD.
COMPANY: DET Coaching Centre - DCC Institute
Claims Objected To:
1. The only Institute in Haryana which has given highest selections in last 15
years in BSc, Agriculture, VS and VLDA.
2. Guarantee of 100% success.
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI approached the concerned Media (Dainik Bhaskar) 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,
“The only Institute in Haryana which has given highest selections in last 15 years in BSc,
Agriculture, VS and VLDA”, was not substantiated with verifiable comparative data on year on
year basis for the last 15 years, of the advertiser’s institute and other similar institutes in
Haryana, to prove that they have been the only one to have given highest selections of students
for the claimed courses, or through an independent third party validation. Claim, “Guarantee of
100% success”, was not substantiated with verifiable supporting data of students who have
achieved 100% success.
The claims are misleading by exaggeration and is likely to lead to grave or widespread
disappointment in the minds of consumers. The advertisement contravened the Guidelines for
Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1, I.4 and I.5 of the
ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD
COMPANY: Hair Grow
Claims Objected To:
1. It’s easy to grow hair, grow real hair in 60 days.
2. Remove baldness even if you are bald from birth.
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in
the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI
Secretariat which they did not avail, but submitted their written response through their advocates.
The advocate on behalf of the advertiser replied that their client (advertiser) has denied of having
published the said advertisement, and hence refused to provide their comments on the complaint.
The CCC viewed the print advertisement, and observed that the advertiser did not provide any
details of the concerned party who had released the advertisement in Dainik Jagran, nor did they
provide any copy of their communication exchanged with the party / concerned media for having
published the said advertisement without their consent. In the absence of these details, the
complaint was placed for processed for CCC deliberations.
In the absence of claim support data, the CCC concluded that the claims, “It’s easy to grow hair,
grow real hair in 60 days”, and “Remove baldness even if you are bald from birth”, were not
substantiated with supporting clinical evidence or with treatment efficacy data. The claims are
misleading by exaggeration and exploit consumers’ lack of knowledge and are likely to lead to
grave or widespread disappointment in the minds of consumers. Efficacy being depicted via
images of before and after the treatment are misleading. Specific to the claims implying baldness
prevention (a condition referred in Schedule J of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act) is in Breach of
the law as it violated The Drugs & Cosmetics Rule 106. The advertisement contravened Chapters
I.1, I.4, I.5 and III.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.
COMPANY: Skyline Builders
PRODUCT: Skyline Cambridge
Claim Objected To:
“Kerala’s No 1 Builder”
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in
the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI
Secretariat which they did not avail, but submitted their written response. The advertiser had
stated in their response that the advertisement highlighted the prominent features of their project
of a residential apartment complex in Trivandrum. The said claim has been made in the context
of their track record of more than 29 years in this field. They are the first
Builders in Kerala to be accredited with CRISIL DA2+ Grade, than any other builders. They have
launched over 127 projects in various parts of Kerala, and along with this the 16 ongoing projects
makes them the No. 1 Builder in Kerala with the highest number of projects launched.
As claim support data, the advertiser provided copy of CRISIL DA2+ Certificate, ISO 9001:2015
Certificate, copy of awards received by them, and News coverages in print media about their
organisation.
Upon carefully viewing the TVC, examining the complaint and the response given by the
advertiser, the CCC observed that the data provided by the advertiser is not relevant for their
claim of being No.1. The advertiser did not provide any key criteria for leadership and verifiable
comparative data with other Builders in Kerala, to prove that they are better than the rest, or
through a third party validation. In the absence of this data, the CCC concluded that the voiceover
claim in the TVC, “Kerala’s No 1 Builder”, was not substantiated. The claim is misleading by
exaggeration and is likely to lead to grave or widespread disappointment in the minds of
consumers. The TVC contravened Chapters I.1, I.4 and I.5 of the ASCI Code. The complaint
was UPHELD.
COMPANY: Cura Pharmaceuticals
PRODUCT: Arshcura Capsule
Claim Objected To:
“Without operation for piles take Arsh cura Piles”
Objection-
The Above claim and product name in the advertisement implies cure
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI approached the concerned Media (Jagran Prakashan 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, “Without operation, for piles take Arsh cura”, was not substantiated with evidence of
product efficacy, and is misleading by exaggeration and is likely to lead to grave or widespread
disappointment in the minds of consumers. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1, I.4,
and I.5 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.
COMPANY: Kavish Range of Products
PRODUCT: Kavish Royal Cream
Claim Objected To:
“For the first time in Indian history what was impossible is now possible; get rid of dark skin
with cream”
Objection-
The before and after visuals in the advertisement appear to be misleading.
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in the
complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI
Secretariat. The advertiser had, however, not responded to ASCI’s request. The CCC noted that
no response was received from the advertiser prior to the prescribed due date for this complaint.
The CCC viewed the print advertisement and upon careful consideration of the complaint, and
in the absence of any comments or response from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the
claim, “For the first time in Indian history what was impossible is now possible; get rid of dark
skin with cream”, was not substantiated with product efficacy data to prove permanent effect on
changing skin complexion. Advertiser also did not provide comparative data versus other similar
creams, for claiming their product to be the first in providing the claimed benefit. The claim is
misleading by exaggeration and is likely to lead to grave or widespread disappointment in the
minds of consumers. Product efficacy being depicted via visuals of before and after the treatment
are misleading by gross exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1, I.4 and I.5 of
the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.
COMPANY: IMM-FOSTIIMA Business School
Claim Objected To:
“100% Campus Placements”
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in
the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI
Secretariat which they did not avail, but replied requesting for an extension to submit their
response. 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 this extension. The advertiser stated in
their response that a total of 112 students had passed out in the year 201718, of which a total of
12 students did not apply for the placements. As claim support data, the advertiser provided an
excel sheet of Placement 2016-2018 giving names of 100 students with the names of companies
where they were placed, and names of 12 students who did not apply for placements.
Upon carefully viewing the print advertisement, examining the complaint and the response with
the supporting data given by the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “100% Campus
Placements”, was inadequately substantiated with authentic supporting data such as detailed list
of students who have been placed through their Institute, contact details of students for
verification, enrolment forms and appointment letters received by the students, nor any
independent audit or verification certificate. The claim is misleading by exaggeration and is likely
to lead to grave or widespread disappointment in the minds of consumers. The advertisement
contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as
Chapters I.1, I.4 and I.5 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD
COMPANY: Hindustan Unilever Ltd.
PRODUCT: Pepsodent Toothpaste with Active Clay
Claims Objected to:
1. New Pepsodent Germicheck + with natural clay activated formula
2. 12 hr protection against cavity causing germs
3. Releases Calcium and Minerals to make your teeth strong and prevent cavities
Complaint:
1. With reference to the claims 1-3, please substantiate the claim with claim support data.
The claim support data should not be based on internal studies or studies commissioned
by Hindustan Unilever Ltd.
2. Is the amount of activated clay significant to make an impact on the performance of the
product as claimed? Is the efficacy data specific to the benefits of the formulation
attributable to the claimed ingredients provided?
3. Can the advertiser prove that the product as sold in its present form has the effectiveness
of each and all of the ingredients as is being claimed in the advertisement since the
ingredients appear to have symbolic presence in the product?
4. The visual shows natural clay in abundance. Is it present in such quantities to qualify
the shown image?
According to us, the advertisement contravenes Chapter 1.1, 1.4 of ASCI code Action to be taken:
We propose that the advertisement should be immediately withdrawn.
CCC RECOMMENDATION: NOT UPHELD
The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the
complainant and forwarded the details of the complaint, verbatim, to the advertiser with a request
to respond to the same. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the
ASCI Secretariat which they availed and subsequently 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 the opinion of Technical expert
presented at the meeting.
Claim – “New Pepsodent Germicheck + with natural clay activated formula” – Advertiser stated
that the product introduced in January 2018 has the proprietary technology of Cetyl Pyridinium
Chloride (CPC) - Clay complex which is being used for the first time. As claim support data, the
advertiser provided copy of the product label artwork showing the list of ingredients, published
study for efficacy of CPC, and journal reference on Synthesis, Characterization and Evaluation
of Clay Based Particulate Antimicrobial Agents. The CCC observed that CPC is an effective
antimicrobial agent for the oral cavity, which is known for its effectiveness and has been useful
in mouth washes due to the lingering effect. The study was done on bovine enamel (tooth). The
lingering effect has been created in the toothpastes by a CPC to clay bonding, which does not
alter the CPC s effectiveness due to alkali treatment.
Claim – “12 hr protection against cavity causing germs” - In response to this objection, the
advertiser stated that the efficacy of the formulation in providing protection against germs for 12
hours was proven through a study on antibacterial effect of a Novel CPC-Clay containing
toothpaste. As claim support data, the advertiser provided a clinical study report of Anti-bacterial
effect of Toothpaste Containing 1.5% CPC-Clay.
Claim – “Releases Calcium and Minerals to make your teeth strong and prevent cavities”-
Advertiser stated that Pepsodent Germicheck is an efficacious toothpaste formulated with
Calcium Carbonate and Sodium Monofluoro Phosphate to make teeth strong and prevent cavities.
As claim support data, the advertiser provided relevant literatures showing fluoride, phosphate
as mineral, a study on In vitro hydrolysis of mono fluoro phosphate by dental plaque
microorganisms, a study on Calcium and Phosphorus concentration of Dental Plaque related to
Dental caries, Relevant literature on caries prevention by fluoride, a study on effect of Calcium
Carbonate - based dentrifice on enamel demineralization, a study showing Calcium and
Phosphorus concentration of Dental Plaque related to Dental caries.
The CCC observed that Calcium carbonate based toothpastes are known to release Calcium and
enhance the level of calcium ion in plaque. This was supported by a study on Calcium and
Phosphorus concentration of Dental Plaque related to Dental caries. The Sodium-
Monofluorophosphate (MFP) contained in the toothpaste, increases the fluoride ion
concentration of plaque, within minutes of brushing. Besides fluoride, concentration of minerals
like Calcium and Phosphorous in plaque, have an inverse relationship with caries. Calcium
carbonate, in the toothpaste, enhances effect of fluoride and makes it more effective in reducing
enamel (tooth) demineralization. Based on the advertiser’s response with the supporting data
provided, the CCC concluded that the claims,
“New Pepsodent Germicheck + with natural clay activated formula”, “12 hr protection against
cavity causing germs”, and “Releases Calcium and Minerals to make your teeth strong and
prevent cavities”, were substantiated. The creatively depicted visual was not considered to be
objectionable. The complaint was NOT UPHELD.
COMPANY: TV9 (TV9 Gujarati)
Claim:
“TV9 Gujarati No. 1
Objection:
1. Please substantiate the claim with claim support data. The claim support data should not
be internal or based on studies commissioned by TV9 Gujarati.
2. Is there data to show how TV9 Gujarati compares with other News Channels in Gujarat?
Is the claim substantiated with any market survey data or verifiable comparative data of advertiser
services with other competitive services? Is there any third party validation to prove these claims?
Is the credibility and authenticity of the certifying bodies well established?
According to us, the advertisement contravenes Chapter 1.1, 1.2 and 1.4 of ASCI code. Action to
be taken: We propose that the advertisement should be immediately withdrawn.”
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the
complainant and forwarded the details of the complaint, verbatim, to the advertiser with a request
to respond to the same. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the
ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser had, however, not responded to ASCI’s request. The CCC noted
that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the prescribed due date for this
complaint. The CCC viewed the TVC and upon careful consideration of the complaint, and in
the absence of any comments or response from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim,
“TV9 Gujarati No. 1”, was not substantiated with viewership data of the advertiser’s channel
against all other competitive channels, to prove that it is in leadership position (No.1) than the
rest, and is misleading by exaggeration and implication. The source for the claim was not
indicated in the TVC. The TVC contravened Chapters I.1, I.2, and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The
complaint was UPHELD
COMPANY: The Himalaya Drug Company
PRODUCT: Himalaya Kajal
Claims objected to:
1. 100% natural black colour gives you intensely expressive eyes
2. Its almond oil helps in nourishing and damask rose helps in cooling
Complaint:
The ad begins with a voiceover saying that your eyes say a lot. We see various clips where Kajal
Agarwal throws a birthday cake at her friends face, picks up the keys and rides a 2-wheeler, eats
ice cream all focusing on her eyes. Voiceover about Himalaya Kajal- 100% natural black colour
gives you intensely expressive eyes. Its almond oil helps in nourishing and damask rose helps in
cooling.
CCC RECOMMENDATION: NOT UPHELD
The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the
complainant and forwarded the details of the complaint, verbatim, to the advertiser with a request
to respond to the same. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the
ASCI Secretariat which they availed and subsequently submitted their written response.
Advertiser provided copy of product label and product license. The claim support data provided
by the advertiser was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC viewed the TVC and
considered the Advertiser’s response as well as the opinion of the Technical expert presented at
the meeting.
Claim – “100% natural black colour gives you intensely expressive eyes” – Advertiser stated that
the product is formulated with 100% vegetable carbon black and it's the only natural pigment/
colorant used in the formulation to impart intense black color. Advertiser provided a copy of
certificate from the supplier of Vegetable Carbon Black and copy of relevant reference from the
database of Personal Care Products Council.
The CCC observed that the advertiser has followed classical method of preparation of Kajal
thereby developing natural black color of the product. Based on the advertiser’s response with
the supporting data, the CCC concluded that the claim, “100% natural black colour gives you
intensely expressive eyes”, was substantiated.
Claim – “Its almond oil helps in nourishing and damask rose helps in cooling” – In response to
this objection, the advertiser stated that the benefits defined with regard to the Almond oil and
Damask Rose are purely ingredient-based claims. Himalaya Kajal is infused with Almond oil.
The product also has goodness of Damask rose known for its cooling property. Each pack of the
product (weighing 2.7 g) contains 27.87 mg rose extracts. The advertiser submitted formula
details and relevant literature references.
The CCC observed that the use of ingredients almond and damask rose are prescribed in classical
texts to obtain Kajal as is being claimed.
Based on this assessment, the CCC concluded that the claim, “Its almond oil helps in nourishing
and damask rose helps in cooling”, was substantiated.
The CCC observed that the visual of the celebrity when seen in conjunction with these claims
were not likely to mislead consumers regarding the product.
The complaints were NOT UPHELD.
COMPANY: Singhania University
Claims objected to:
1. India’s first innovative Industrial training based placement oriented education.
2. India’s first innovative competitive exams focused integrated curriculum.
Objections:
1. Please substantiate claims 1 and 2 with claim support data. The claim support data should not
be internal or based on studies commissioned by Singhania University.
According to us, the advertisement contravenes Chapter 1.1, 1.2 and 1.4 of ASCI code. Action
to be taken: We propose that the advertisement should be immediately withdrawn.
ASCI observed that the advertisement makes a claim of “100% Placement Assistance” which is
likely to be misleading by implication.
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the
complainant and forwarded the details of the complaint, verbatim, to the advertiser with a request
to respond to the same. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the
ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser had, however, not responded to ASCI’s request. The CCC noted
that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the prescribed due date for this
complaint. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and upon careful consideration of the
complaint, and in the absence of any comments or response from the advertiser, the CCC
concluded that the claims, “India’s 1st Innovative Industrial training based placement oriented
education”, and “India’s 1st Innovative competitive exams focused integrated curriculum”, were
not substantiated with any verifiable comparative data of the advertiser’s institute and other
similar institutes to prove that they are pioneers in providing innovative training / exams. The
claims are misleading by exaggeration and is likely to lead to grave or widespread disappointment
in the minds of consumers. The print advertisement contravened
Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1, I.4
and I.5 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD
COMPANY: Romana Distillery Industrial Pvt
PRODUCT: Romana Water
Claim Objected To:
“Water with highest natural minerals available in Kerala.”
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in
the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI
Secretariat which they did not avail, but submitted their written response. The advertiser had
stated in their response that their product contains maximum natural minerals and the richness of
these natural minerals in their source of water is equipping them to supply mineral rich water.
Several tests done both in house and also through approved laboratories have confirmed a TDS
levels of more than 80 ppm, than the TDS levels of other manufacturers which ranges from 5 to
40.
As this response was only assertions and inadequate, ASCI requested the advertiser to provide
test reports and comparative data versus other leading manufacturers. The advertiser was further
granted an extension of seven days to submit their reply in response to their request for an
extension of two weeks. Further they were provided with an opportunity to discuss their
submission via telecon. Subsequently, the advertiser provided test reports of their product, both
in house and from external agency and in house test for competitor product. Upon carefully
viewing the print advertisement, examining the complaint and the response with the supporting
data given by the advertiser, the CCC observed that while the advertiser provided test report from
external agency for their own product, such third party test data for competitor products was not
provided. The CCC did not consider the advertiser’s in house data reliable and acceptable for
comparative claim. There was no rationale as to why advertiser’s product would have high
minerals as compared to other similar products that were also sourced in a similar manner.
Based on these observations, the CCC concluded that the claim, “Water with highest natural
minerals available in Kerala”, was inadequately substantiated. The claim was misleading by
exaggeration and likely to lead to grave or widespread disappointment in the minds of consumers.
The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1, I.4 and I.5 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was
UPHELD.
COMPANY: Ahzaab Foods Pvt Ltd
PRODUCT: Healthy Wings
Claims Objected To:
“More protein” “Less fat”
CCC RECOMMENDATION: NOT UPHELD
The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objections raised in
the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI
Secretariat which they did not avail, but submitted their written response. The advertiser had
stated in their response that the claims made are based on laboratory test report, for which they
referred to a website link for comparison of the protein and fat content of their chicken.
The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the advertiser’s response. The CCC
also verified the website link which referred to a published Report in public domain on `United
States Department of Agriculture (USDA) – National Nutrient Database for Standard Reference
– Release April 2018’, giving details on proximate nutrient values and weights of chicken.
The CCC observed that as per the lab test report, the protein value of the chicken was 21.9g/100g
which was more than the prescribed limit (18.60g/100g), and the fat content was 1.04g/100g
which was lesser than the prescribed limit (15.06g/100g) as compared to Broiler variety of
chicken.
Based on these observations, the CCC concluded that the claims, “More protein” and “Less fat”
were substantiated. The complaint was NOT UPHELD.
COMPANY: Marico. Ltd.
PRODUCT: Saffola Gold
Claim Objected to:
“Oil is absorbed less while frying”
Complaint:
Description: Advertisement starts with a wife asking her husband not to eat fried food. But her
husband doesn’t stop. Then she says that her husband. Vishal’s habit of eating fried food will not
reduce. But thankfully her Saffola Gold oil is absorbed less while frying. She then asks (the
viewers) what about your oil? Saffola Gold pack is shown. Voiceover – Saffola, Dil se healthy.
Objections:
1. Please substantiate the claim with claim support data. The claim support data should not
be internal or based on studies commissioned by Marico Ltd.
2. The claim Saffola Gold Oil is absorbed less is in comparison with which oil? Is there a
like to like comparison made or data is presented in such a way so as to suggest that
Saffola Oil is better than is truly the case?
3. Even if the oil has low absorption, how does the advertiser promote unhealthy eating by
saying that the habit of eating fried will not reduce but thankfully Saffola gold is
absorbed less. According to us, the advertisement contravenes Chapter 1.1, 1.4 and 1.5
and Self-Regulation Guidelines on Advertising of Foods & Beverages (F& B) of ASCI
code. Action to be taken: We propose that the advertisement should be immediately
withdrawn.”
CCC RECOMMENDATION: NOT UPHELD
The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the
complainant and forwarded the details of the complaint, verbatim, to the advertiser with a request
to respond to the same. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the
ASCI Secretariat which they availed, and subsequently submitted their written response. The
advertiser had stated in their response that Saffola Gold is made using the patented Losorb®
technology which means that lesser quantities of the oil are absorbed. External laboratory tests
conducted established that Saffola Gold absorbed less than other oils in the market. As claim
support data, the Advertiser provided a copy of the granted patent, and a copy of the laboratory
report.
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 observed that the study undertaken in 2017 took into account the variety
of oils generally used for frying in kitchen. The said support data was considered as acceptable
for the claim made.
Based on this assessment, the CCC concluded that the claim “…. Saffola Gold khaane mein kam
absorb hota hai”, (“Oil is absorbed less while frying”) was substantiated.
The CCC did not agree with the complainant’s argument that the advertisement is promoting
unhealthy eating. The complaint was NOT UPHELD.
The following advertisement was considered to be, prima facie, in violation of The Drugs &
Magic Remedies Act / The Drugs & Cosmetics Rules, and are being referred to the Ministry of
Ayush
Sr. No Advertiser (Brand / Product)
Claims Objected to Remarks (Clause
Applicable)
1. Vee Excel
Drugs And Pharmaceutica
ls Private Limited - AXL
Vega Fem
Breast
Enlargement gel and
capsules
1. Based on natural herbal
formula, the product also helps
in gaining softer, smother
texture breasts as
well as much younger
looking cleavage without
requirement for dangerous and
costly implants or
injections.
2. Being safe to use, these
are highly effective with no side
effects and the ingredients used
in this product works by
gradually augmenting size as
well as shape of breasts which
helps to promotes healthy
transformation.
Form and
structure of the
female bust Item
No.21- DMR
Schedule
COMPANY: Franke Faber India Ltd.
PRODUCT: Faber 3D Hood Chimney
Claims Objected to:
1. The world's only 3D chimney with 3 way suction that makes your kitchen completely smoke-
free
2. 15% better grease reduction,
3. 25% Higher Suction area
Complaint:
Description: The ad begins with visuals of Faber Chimney with taglines saying, “World’s only
3D Hood Chimney”, “15% better grease reduction”, “25% Higher Suction area”, “10dB noise
reduction” and “12 years warranty.” A voiceover is played along with the visuals- “Faber
presents the world's only 3D chimney with 3 way suction that makes your kitchen completely
smoke-free. Now quit smoking in the kitchen.” A woman who is shown cooking in the kitchen
says, “Bring home the Faber 3D Hood today and quit smoking in the kitchen.
Our objections:
1. Please substantiate claims 1 to 3 with claim support data. The claim support data should not
be internal or based on studies commissioned by Franke Faber India Ltd.
2. Reference to claim 2 and 3; ‘15% better grease reduction’ and ‘25% Higher Suction area’ as
compared to what? Please substantiate.
According to us, the advertisement contravenes Chapter 1.1, 1.2 and 1.4 of the ASCI Code.
Action to be taken: We propose that the advertisement should be immediately withdrawn.
CCC RECOMMENDATION ON RE-EXAMINATION: 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.
Advertiser replied post the due date of ASCI’s earlier letter requesting for their comments on the
complaint. They informed that the said letter was addressed to their registered address which is
their production location, and hence there was a delay internally at the advertiser’s end in
delivering the letter to the correct contact address. In view of this, the Advertiser requested for
re-examination of the complaint, and also advised ASCI to keep the CCC recommendation on
hold, and assured that they would immediately suspend the offending TVC if CCC felt that the
said TVC required modification after re-examination.
Subsequently, the advertiser submitted their written response. The claim support data was
reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC viewed the TVC and considered the
Advertiser’s response as well as the opinion of Technical expert presented at the meeting.
Claim – “The world's only 3D chimney with 3 way suction that makes your kitchen completely
smoke-free” - Advertiser replied that the claim of “World’s only 3D Chimney” was based on
market search of all the leading brands for Kitchen hoods/ Range Hood/ Extractor Hood category,
wherein the advertiser verified the contents of these product catalogues and their relevant
websites available in public opinion, and found that none of them offered products with 3 way
suction technology as that of advertiser. For the claim, “Makes your kitchen completely smoke-
free”, the advertiser stated that in Faber 3D hoods, there are two additional lateral filters on the
body of the hood which enables the suction to happen from 3 directions. This feature is not
available in other brands hence they are unable to provide three directional suction.
The CCC noted that the advertiser has surveyed the major significant manufactures of kitchen
chimneys in the market and observed that none of these made chimney with the 3D technology.
Based on the advertiser’s response, the claim of “The world's only 3D chimney with 3 way
suction”, was not considered to be objectionable. This complaint was Not Upheld on Re-
examination.
However, the advertiser did not provide any evidence that smoke concentrations in the kitchen
was measured with and without the chimneys. “Completely smoke-free” being an absolute claim
for the Chimney performance, in the absence of any test data to prove 100% removal of smoke,
the CCC concluded that the claim, “Makes your kitchen completely smoke-free”, was not
substantiated, and is misleading by exaggeration. The TVC contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of
the ASCI Code. This complaint stands Upheld on Re-examination.
Claims – “15% better grease reduction” and “25% Higher Suction area” – In response to these
objections, the advertiser stated that these claims are based on increased surface area available
for suction owing to presence of lateral filters. Advertiser in their response provided a table
showing calculation for comparison of the suction area between a normal chimney and a 3D
Chimney. The results showed that the 3D chimney with lateral filters, offered 46% and 30%
higher suction area when compared with non 3D chimney of the same size. The CCC observed
that 15% better grease reduction and 25% higher suction area based on higher area for suction
due to lateral entry and 46-30% more area in these chimneys is feasible. Based on this
assessment, and in the absence of any data contrary to this performance claim, this complaint
was Not Upheld on Reexamination.
COMPANY: TAFE Motors and Tractors Limited
Complaint:
Can be varified with company balance sheet and members transactions. 30 lakh saving by tafe
no to and tractor is misleading advertising.how it is possible. Hindustan times Delhi 24 5 page
11.
buy 125 kva generator and save upto 30 lakh is totallly a misleading adver. what is the cost of
generator and how it is saving 30 lakh never possible. is there any example of 125 kva used by
any customer as claimed by tafe.
CCC RECOMMENDATION ON RE-EXAMINATION: 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. Advertiser replied post the due date of ASCI’s earlier letter requesting for their
comments on the complaint. They requested for re-examination of the CCC recommendation
and informed that they have suspended publishing of the said advertisement pending
reexamination recommendation. Subsequently, the advertiser submitted their response for re-
examination. As claim support data, the advertiser provided brochures of various Genset
manufacturers. Advertiser in their response also provided a comparative table showing fuel
consumption values of the advertiser’s model – 125KVA and similar models of other
manufacturers. The results showed that the maximum difference in the fuel consumed
between 125KVA model and other models was 2.5 liters per hour. Advertiser further
explained the calculations for the saving amount claimed, which is Rs.2.5 per liter less than the
other models, multiplied by the cost of diesel price per liter (Rs.73), further multiplied by the
total running hours (i.e. 20000) of 125 KVA, which summed upto Rs.36 lakhs.
The claim support data was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC viewed the
print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response as well as the opinion of
Technical expert presented at the meeting. The CCC observed that the advertisement claims
a saving of “up to Rs 30 lakhs” on purchase of TMTL genset. The advertiser provided
evidence based on the fuel consumption from catalogues of competitors and compared the
performance at 75% Full load (constant) for the entire 20,000 hours of operation. It was noted
that the difference in fuel consumption ranges from 0.3 litres/ hour to 2.5 liters/hour depending
on the baseline model against which a comparison was made. The cumulative saving over the
20,000 hours of operation was computed with the highest possible saving (2.5 l/hour) to get
the Rs 30 lakhs figure. In a certain case for a comparison with a specific competitor model for
constant operation at 75% full load for the total rated life these savings may be achieved, to
which the advertiser provided a plausible explanation. Based on this assessment, the CCC
concluded that the claim (in Hindi) “125 KVA generator ke purna kaaryakaal mein Rs. 30 lakh
ki bachat”, was substantiated. The complaint was Not Upheld on Reexamination.
COMPANY: Blue Star Limited
PRODUCT: Blue Star Water Purifier
Complaint:
Claims that the use of the water purifier Improves immunity. Claims it as "immuno boost"
Technology. How can just consuming purified water improve immunity? Use Children as models
drinking water form water bottles. Can someone show children in such advs? Is it not against
using infants and children in ads? Making such a tall health benefit claims? This need to be
stopped. How can a simple water purifier claim that it can enhance Immunity and they Firm
claims "IMMUNO BOOST TECHNOLOGY". It is not easy to alter the immunity of person and
that too with drinking purified water. This looks like a tall claim.
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the
complainant and forwarded the details of the complaint, verbatim, to the advertiser with a request
to respond to the same. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the
ASCI Secretariat which they availed and subsequently submitted their written response. The
advertiser had stated in their response that Immuno Boost Technology enhances the pH level of
water, giving alkaline water. If the purified water passes through an Immuno Boost Cartridge it
provides alkaline antioxidant water which on purification strengthens the defense system
enhancing immunity.
As claim support data, the advertiser provided Certificate of analysis report, role of alkaline
antioxidant water in boosting immunity, Summary of literature review that Alkaline / Antioxidant
water enhances immune system, Detailed clinical research that Alkaline water enhances immune
system.
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 observed the literature and references provided by the advertiser related
to potential health benefits of electrolytically processed water, mainly in animals and a few in
humans. Literature cited was not with the respondent Company's product.
No test report of the ARW produced by the Company’s unit was provided, neither as to the
physico-chemical effects, like reduction potentials, nor to its immune action. Various test reports
provided related to the compliance to water quality standards and were not related to the immune
boosting action in humans for test with the advertiser's product. For an important claim as
immune-boosting action, it would be necessary to have tests with the advertiser's product
showing immune boosting action in humans.
Based on this assessment, the CCC concluded that the claim, “Immuno Boost Technology”, was
inadequately substantiated. The claim is misleading by exaggeration, exploits consumers’ lack
of knowledge and is likely to lead to grave or widespread disappointment in the minds of
consumers. The TVC contravened Chapters I.1, I.4 and I.5 of the ASCI Code. This complaint
was UPHELD.
COMPANY: Kish Academy
Complaint:
Kish Academy Claiming "most successful institute for cat coaching in Guntur & Vijayawada,
also claiming 172 students secured IIM Selections, further the claim" 103 local college students
secured IIM admissions"
The claim "most successful institute for cat coaching in Guntur & Vijayawada" is completely
misleading. On what parameters does Kish academy claim to be the most successful? Do they
have comparative figures of other similar coaching institutes to substantiate their claim?
The claim "172 students secured IIM Selections" is also vague and misleading as it's not
mentioned in which year these students have been selected in the IIMs.
Also, they have not mentioned about any third party validation of their results.
Also, the claim" 103 local college students secured IIM admissions" is completely misleading
and intended to attract aspirants to join Kish academy. The claim is vague as they have not
mentioned the name of the colleges or students which shows that they are local college / students.
Kish academy must be asked to prove and validate these fake claims
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the
complainant and forwarded the details of the complaint, verbatim, to the advertiser with a
request to respond to the same. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal
Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser had, however, not responded to ASCI’s
request. The CCC noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the
prescribed due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the Ad – Hoarding, and upon careful
consideration of the complaint, and in the absence of any comments or response from the
advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, "Most successful institute for CAT coaching in
Guntur & Vijayawada”, was not substantiated with any market survey data, comparative data
of the advertiser’s institute and other similar institutes to prove that they are better than the rest
in providing CAT coaching, or through a third party validation. Claims, “172 students
secured IIM Admissions” and “103 local college students secured IIM admissions", were not
substantiated with supporting data such as detailed list of students with their contact details,
enrolment forms, and the year these students were selected in the IIMs. The claims are
misleading by exaggeration and are likely to lead to grave or widespread disappointment in the
minds of consumers. The Ad - Hoarding contravened Guidelines for Advertising of
Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1, I.4 and I.5 of the ASCI Code.
The complaint was UPHELD.
COMPANY: Lenskart.com
Complaint:
2 Pairs Rs 999 for Gold members.
Lenskart has this major promotion pasted on the glass door of its showroom at Connaught Place
Mall, Greater Noida whereby they claim to offer 2 pairs at Rs 999 for Gold Members. We went
ahead and purchased 2 spectacle frames worth Rs 999 each and asked the store incharge to make
us a Gold Member at their asking price of Rs 500 to avail the aforesaid offer. The store manager
said that the offer is not valid in our case as we have not procured the lenses for the spectacle
frames to which we said that your advertisement was misleading thereby. There is no mention of
this condition and it's neither displayed anywhere within the store. After we have invested so
much time in selecting our frames, you are telling this to us. Just to honor our time, we paid the
full asking amount for the two frames but we feel that this advertisement need to be qualified
specially when it's stuck on the showroom main door.
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the
complainant and forwarded the details of the complaint, verbatim, to the advertiser with a
request to respond to the same. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing
with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser had, however, not responded to ASCI’s request. The
CCC noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the prescribed due date
for this complaint. The CCC viewed the Ad – promotional offer displayed at the advertiser’s
showroom, and upon careful consideration of the complaint, and in the absence of any
comments or response from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “2 Pairs Rs 999
for Gold members”, was misleading by omission that the offer is available only on purchase of
2 pairs of spectacle frames with lenses, and subject to Terms and Conditions. The claim offer is
likely to lead to grave or widespread disappointment in the minds of consumers. The Ad –
promotional offer contravened Chapters I.1, I.4 and I.5 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was
UPHELD
COMPANY: Future Retail Limited (Big Bazaar)
Complaint:
Wednesday Bazar Vegetables at Rs 6 per 250g appeared in Times of India on Wednesday 18
July 2018. Picture in the advertisement showed prominently many vegetables that were not
covered under this price thus misleading the customers resulting in wastage of their time, energy
and money.
In addition I will further like to add the following:
The advertisement very prominently displays major items like 1 Phool gobhi, 2 Cabbage, 3
Bhindi, 4 Coconut, 5 Beans, 6 Carrot, 7 Lemon, 8 Cucumber, 9 Spinach and few others.
But the actual list sent by Big Bazar through sms does not include these items. Their SMS
message is reproduced below:
"Buy below Fresh Veggies @Rs 6/250g:
[Buy 1 Potato, 2 Bottle Gourd, 3 Beetroot, 4 Onion white, 5 Cucumber white, 6 Pumpkin red, 7
Tendli, 8 Chilli
green, 8 Brinjal Small / 9 Leafy bunch (per piece) - Spinach, Dhaniya &
Mint Leaves] Till 18-Jul.T&C"
It is evident from the above that the advertisement had included many costly items to attract the
customers when they had no intention to sell them at the specified price of Rs 6 per 250 gm.
Because of the misleading advertisement, we had to spend our time, energy and money to go to
Big Bazar store and had to return disappointed or buy them at higher prices.
Big Bazar have brought out similar advertisement today in Print media and TV with '* Offer
valid on select vegetables' which has already reported to you earlier is highly misleading since
most of items that appear in the advertisement are NOT in the selected list of vegetables.
You are requested to take appropriate action quickly to avoid misleading of consumers by Big
Bazar.
I had hoped that you would in fact ask Big Bazar to send the list of items covered under the
discount and compare them with the printed advertisement. A photo of the sms as received on
my mobile is attached. This includes date and time as well.
I hope you will take a prompt action to limit such misleading advertisements which cause
considerable inconvenience to customers.
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the
complainant and forwarded the details of the complaint, verbatim, to the advertiser with a request
to respond to the same. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the
ASCI Secretariat which they did not avail, but submitted their written response. The advertiser
had stated in their response that the pictures/images shown in the advertisement were general
pictorial representations. The advertisement mentioned that the pictures are for representation
purpose only, and the offer is valid on select vegetables. The vegetables sold at Rs.6 per 250 gm
included Potato Economy Pkd, Bottle Gourd Long, Beetroot pkd, Onion White, Cucumber White
pkd, Pumpkin red, Small Gourd pkd, Chilli Light Green, Brinjal Round Small Purple.
The CCC also viewed the SMS provided by the complainant which stated "Buy below Fresh
Veggies @Rs 6/250g: [Buy 1 Potato, 2 Bottle Gourd, 3 Beetroot, 4 Onion white, 5 Cucumber
white, 6 Pumpkin red, 7 Tendli, 8 Chilli green, 8 Brinjal Small / 9 Leafy bunch (per piece) -
Spinach, Dhaniya & Mint Leaves]. Till 18Jul.T&C".
The CCC viewed the print advertisement, SMS text and considered the advertiser’s response.
The CCC observed that several of the vegetables that appeared in the advertisement under the
discount offer did not feature in the selected list of vegetables which was conveyed via SMS to
the complainant. The CCC did not agree with the advertiser’s contention that the visuals of some
of the vegetables (which were not part of the offer) were for representation purpose only since
several options depicted were not covered by the offer. Based on the evidence provided by the
complainant, and the offer being limited to only select vegetables, the CCC concluded that the
advertisement displaying - Phool Gobhi, Cabbage, Bhindi, Coconut, Beans, Carrot, Lemon,
Cucumber, Spinach, and few others under the discount offer of “Rs.6 per 250 g”, was false, and
a misrepresentation of facts. The visual is likely to lead to grave or widespread disappointment
in the minds of consumers. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1, I.4 and I.5 of the ASCI
Code. The complaint was UPHELD
COMPANY: Triveni Sangam Chaitanya Jagran
Claim Objected to:
“Cure all types of Ailments (Disease) Without Medicine.”
Complaint:
This advertise claims to ‘cure all types of ailments (disease) without medicine’ which I think can
create misguidance for people also let people think that diseases can be treated by without visting
doctor and medicines.. this may be serious heath hazard for the prople enlarge. I request you to
take immediate action not to use such puncy headlines and stop these kind of advertisements.
Phone numbers are being mentioned on the pamplet. I also think only a MCI recognised doctor
with valid degree and valid registration should only be able to treat diseases. This doctor
mentioned on the advertisement has claim to cure disease but has not mentioned his registration
number also ..Behind Sai Mandir, Takiya Ward, Bhandara. Maharashtra 441904.
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the
complainant and forwarded the details of the complaint, verbatim, to the advertiser with a request
to respond to the same. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the
ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser had, however, not responded to ASCI’s request. The CCC noted
that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the prescribed due date for this
complaint. The CCC viewed the Ad – Pamphlet which was an insert circulated with Times of
India, and observed that the it was for a promotion of a programme – seminar on solution for
health problem by Dr. Satish Sawarkar.
The CCC observed that the advertiser did not provide any details of treatment procedure nor any
technical or scientific rationale for claiming cure of ailments.
Upon careful consideration of the complaint, and in the absence of any comments or response
from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “Cure all types of Ailments (Disease)
Without Medicine”, was not substantiated and is misleading by gross exaggeration and exploits
the consumers’ lack of knowledge and is likely to lead to grave or widespread disappointment in
the minds of consumers. The Ad - Pamphlet contravened Chapters I.1, I.4, and I.5 of the ASCI
Code. The complaint was UPHELD.
COMPANY: Times Network Ltd (Times Now)
Complaint:
“On Air Promotion on Times Now on 02nd Aug'18 & Mailer on same Date.
Times Now has used sliced Target Group NCCS AB M22-50 AB & NCCS AB 22-50 to calculate
relative channel share to do promotion on channel & through mailer respectively. These sliced
Target Groups are not Permissible by BARC. Kindly take action on same.”
CCC RECOMMENDATION: NOT UPHELD
The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the
complainant and forwarded the details of the complaint, verbatim, to the advertiser with a request
to respond to the same. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the
ASCI Secretariat which they did not avail, but submitted their written response. The advertiser
in their response denied the false allegations made in the complaint of using sliced Target Group
to claim leadership position.
The complaint was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC viewed the Ad – TV
promo and Ad – Mailer, and considered the Advertiser’s response as well as the opinion of
Technical expert presented at the meeting.
The CCC observed that Ad – TV promo has qualified their leadership position based on BARC
source – NCCS AB Males 22-50 All India 1Min+ Wk 23-30’18 24 hrs Relative Share. The Ad
– mailer quoted the source as
NCCS AB 22-50 Wk 23-30’18 Relative Share basis imps’000.
The data is directionally correct as Times Now leads in both 22+ and 22-50 yrs audiences. The
Ad – TV promo and the Ad – Mailer was based on data for eight weeks Wk 23-30’18 to promote
the advertiser’s channel as No. 1 in English News genre. As the target group NCCS AB Males
22-50 can be directly queried from the BARC system, the CCC did not consider such reference
to be objectionable in the context of the advertisement. The complaint was NOT UPHELD.
COMPANY: Paytm E-Commerce Pvt Ltd
PRODUCT: Paytm
Complaint:
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the
complainant and forwarded the details of the complaint, verbatim, to the advertiser with a request
to respond to the same. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the
ASCI Secretariat which they did not avail, but submitted their written response. The advertiser
argued that the product listing under complaint is not an advertisement nor does it fall under the
definition of advertisement. The said product (Suzuki Access 125 SE CBS) was displayed by a
seller/merchant (Nuclear Motors Sales and Services Pvt Ltd) on PayTm Mall platform for sale
and not for advertisement purpose. The complainant placed an order in July 2018 and paid an
amount of Rs. 20,000/- towards booking amount. The order was to be fulfilled by the said
Merchant by delivering the product to the customer in August 2018. The said amount received
upon placement of Order was duly remitted by Paytm Mall to the Merchant. At the time of
delivery of the Product, the Customer was required to pay an additional amount pertaining to the
Registration charges, Road Taxes, Insurance Premium, etc. Advertiser provided a copy of the
Principal Display Page of the said product listing.
The CCC viewed the website advertisement (original complained screenshot as well as page
revised to include booking amount text) and considered the advertiser’s response. As per 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 through
product listing on an online platform, paid or unpaid, has to be considered as Advertising. The
CCC noted that subsequent to receiving the complaint from ASCI, the advertiser had included a
description of “booking amount” against Rs 20,000.
The CCC concluded that the claim related to the price of the product (Suzuki Access 125 SE CBS
- Disc) quoted as Rs.20,000/- was misleading by ambiguity and omission to mention that it is
only a booking amount, with an additional convenience fees applicable. The visual is likely to
lead to grave or widespread disappointment in the minds of consumers. The website
advertisement contravened Chapter I.4 and I.5 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.
COMPANY: K G Dholakiya
Claim
Objected To:
“Gujarat's No.1
School”
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in the
complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI
Secretariat. The advertiser had, however, not responded to ASCI’s request. The CCC noted that
no response was received from the advertiser prior to the prescribed due date for this complaint.
The CCC viewed the print advertisement and upon careful consideration of the complaint, and
in the absence of any comments or response from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the
claim, “Gujarat's No.1 School”, was not substantiated with any verifiable comparative data of
the advertiser’s institute and similar institutes in Gujarat, to prove that it is in leadership position
(No.1) than the rest, or through a third party validation. The source for the claim was not indicated
in the advertisement. The claim is misleading by exaggeration and is likely to lead to grave or
widespread disappointment in the minds of consumers. The advertisement contravened Chapters
I.1, I.2, I.4 and I.5 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.
COMPANY: Mohak Bariatrics and Robotics
Claims Objected To:
1. Mohak Bariatrics has performed India & Asia’s highest No. of Obesity Surgeries.
2. With Robotic Banded Gastric Bypass you will not regain lost weight again.
3. 10 years more than 9000 patients have got freedom from obesity through Baratric surgery.
4. First time in India, get rid of obesity without surgery – with Endoscopic Sleeve Gastroplasty.
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objections raised in
the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI
Secretariat which they did not avail, but replied seeking for informal resolution of the complaint.
On the advertiser’s request, they were provided with an opportunity to discuss their submission
via telecon which they did not avail.
Upon carefully viewing the print advertisement, examining the complaint and in the absence of
specific comments and claim support data, the CCC concluded that –
Claim, “Mohak Bariatrics has performed India & Asia’s highest No. of Obesity Surgeries”, was
not substantiated with any verifiable comparative data of the advertiser’s clinic and other similar
clinics to prove that the obesity surgeries done by them (in India and Asia) were highest than the
rest.
Claim – “With Robotic Banded Gastric Bypass you will not regain lost weight again”, was not
substantiated with supporting clinical evidence or with treatment efficacy data.
Claim – “10 years more than 9000 patients have got freedom from obesity through Baratric
surgery”, was not substantiated with supporting data for 10 years, with evidence to prove that
more than 9000 patients suffering from obesity were successfully treated by the advertiser’s
clinic, or through a third party validation. Claim – “First time in India, get rid of obesity without
surgery – with Endoscopic Sleeve Gastroplasty”, was False and misleading, as Endoscopic
Sleeve Gastroplasty is considered to be a form of surgery.
These claims exploit consumers’ lack of knowledge and are likely to lead to grave or widespread
disappointment in the minds of consumers. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1, I.4 and
I.5 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD
COMPANY: Vcare’s Herbal Concepts Private Limited
PRODUCT: VCare's Premium Hair Tonik
Claims Objected To:
1. Premium Hair Tonic that stops hair fall immediately.
2. Specially formulated hair complex which will help your hair grow better than any other
ordinary hair oil.
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objections raised in the
complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI
Secretariat. The advertiser had, however, not responded to ASCI’s request. The CCC noted that
no response was received from the advertiser prior to the prescribed due date for this complaint.
The CCC viewed the TVC and upon careful consideration of the complaint, and in the absence
of any comments or response from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “Premium
Hair Tonic that stops hair fall immediately”, was not substantiated with product efficacy data,
and is misleading by gross exaggeration.
Claim, “Specially formulated hair complex which will help your hair grow better than any other
ordinary hair oil”, was not substantiated with comparative data of the advertiser’s product and
other similar hair tonics, for product efficacy. These claims exploit consumers’ lack of
knowledge and are likely to lead to grave or widespread disappointment in the minds of
consumers. The TVC contravened Chapters I.1, I.4 and I.5 of the ASCI Code. The complaint
was UPHELD.
COMPANY: Pakur Polytechnic
Claims Objected To:
1. Jharkhand’s No.1 Polytechnic Institution. (Source of the claim not mentioned)
2. Have facility for 100 percent placement.
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objections raised in
the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI
Secretariat which they did not avail, but submitted their written response. The advertiser in their
response argued that they have never claimed themselves to be No.1 college of Jharkhand, nor
have they provided placement to any of their students. Their academic session started in 2016,
and the first batch would pass out in 2019. The advertiser further informed that the said TVC was
released by the concerned media (Kashish News) without their consent.
Upon carefully viewing the TVC, examining the complaint and the response given by the
advertiser, and in the absence of claim support data, the CCC concluded that the claim,
“Jharkhand’s No.1 Polytechnic Institution”, was not substantiated with any verifiable
comparative data of the advertiser’s institute and other similar institutes to prove that they are in
leadership position (No.1) in Jharkhand than the rest, or through a third party validation, and is
misleading by exaggeration.
Claim, “Have facility for 100 percent placement”, implying guarantee for jobs, which is in fact
a future guarantee, is misleading by ambiguity and implication. The claims are likely to lead to
grave or widespread disappointment in the minds of consumers. The TVC contravened the
Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1, I.4
and I.5 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.
COMPANY: CBS Group of Institutes
Claim Objected To:
“Best Institute of Haryana”
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in the
complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI
Secretariat. The advertiser had, however, not responded to ASCI’s request. The CCC noted that
no response was received from the advertiser prior to the prescribed due date for this complaint.
The CCC viewed the TVC and upon careful consideration of the complaint, and in the absence
of any comments or response from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “Best
Institute of Haryana”, was not substantiated with any market survey data, or verifiable
comparative data of the advertiser’s institute and other similar institutes in Haryana, to prove that
it is better than the rest in providing the courses claimed, or through an independent third party
validation. The claim is misleading by exaggeration and is likely to lead to grave or widespread
disappointment in the minds of consumers. The TVC contravened the Guidelines for Advertising
of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1, I.4 and I.5 of the ASCI Code.
The complaint was UPHELD.
COMPANY: Kavish Range of Products
PRODUCT: Kavish Royal Cream
Claims Objected To:
1. Remove dark circles, chronic freckles, chronic burn marks, chronic deep black marks,
chronic stretch marks, chronic acne marks from the roots permanently.
2. Get rid of smallpox marks and dark skin of neck completely.
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objections raised in the
complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI
Secretariat. The advertiser had, however, not responded to ASCI’s request. The CCC noted that
no response was received from the advertiser prior to the prescribed due date for this complaint.
The CCC viewed the print advertisement and upon careful consideration of the complaint, and
in the absence of any comments or response from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the
claims, “Remove dark circles, chronic freckles, chronic burn marks, chronic deep black marks,
chronic stretch marks, chronic acne marks from the roots permanently”, and “Get rid of smallpox
marks and dark skin of neck completely”, were not substantiated with product efficacy data. The
claims read in conjunction with the visuals showing efficacy being depicted via images of before
and after the treatment, are misleading by gross exaggeration and are likely to lead to grave or
widespread disappointment in the minds of consumers. The advertisement contravened Chapters
I.1, I.4 and I.5 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.
COMPANY: Hindustan Unilever Ltd
PRODUCT: Lever Ayush Natural Fairness Saffron Face cream
Claims Objected to:
1. A fairness treatment formulated with 5000 years of Ayurvedic wisdom.
2. The rich blend of Saffron and Kumkumadi Tailam is known to cure marks and lighten
skin complexion
Complaint:
1. Reference to claims 1 and 2 please substantiate with claim support data. The claim
support data should not be internal or based on studies commissioned by Hindustan
Unilever.
2. Reference to claim 1 and 2;these are not generic claims and therefore should be
substantiated by independent data and not just be assertions.
3. Reference to claim 2; is the amount of the ingredients Saffron and Kumkumadi Tailam
significant to make an impact on the performance of the product as claimed, is the
efficacy data specific to the benefits of the formulation attributable to the claimed
ingredients provided?
4. Can the advertiser prove that the product as sold in its present form is similar to textual
preparation/s or has the effectiveness of each and all of the ingredients as is being
claimed in the advertisement since the ingredients appear to have symbolic presence in
the product?
5. The name Ayush can confuse a consumer to think that it is certified by Ministry of
AYUSH (Ayurveda, Yoga and Naturopathy, Unani, Siddha and Homeopathy). Has
Ministry of AYUSH certified this product and permitted the advertisers to use the
name? If no, then it is grossly misleading.
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.”
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the
complainant and forwarded the details of the complaint, verbatim, to the advertiser with a
request to respond to the same. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing
with the ASCI Secretariat which they availed and subsequently submitted their written
response. The advertiser in their response referred to 58 ayurvedic granthas which form the
basis of Ayurveda and are relied upon by the ayurvedic doctors or vaidyas. Basis authentic
prescriptions recited in these granthas, the Advertiser has developed the range of ayurvedic
products. These 58 Ayurvedic Granthas are duly recognized by the Drugs and Cosmetics Act
1940.
Advertiser further stated that the product is an Ayurvedic Proprietary Medicine and the key
ayurvedic ingredients in the Product is basis text in authentic ayurvedic granthas and their
prescribed benefits as per ayurvedic text. Saffron is an ayurvedic herb with great medicinal value
known and recommended for its brightening and healing properties, and Kumkumadi tailam is a
unique blend of 14 herbs and oil, formulated to cure marks, lighten skin colour and improve skin
quality.
As claim support data, the advertiser provided Copy of product label along with product
composition, Relevant extracts of the annual report 2013-14 issued by the Ministry of AYUSH,
Relevant extracts of the authentic ayurvedic texts for saffron and Kumkumadi Tailam, Letter from
Arya Vaidya Pharmacy (Coimbatore) Limited confirming presence of ayurvedic ingredients in
the Product, Letter from a researcher in Ayurveda, certifying that the ingredients in the Product
are from ancient ayurvedic texts and the Product is capable of delivering the benefits of such
ingredients.
The claim support data was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC viewed the
website advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response as well as the opinion of
Technical expert presented at the meeting.
The CCC observed that the claim refers to 5000 years of ayurvedic wisdom whereas the
Ayurvedic texts being referred in the advertiser’s response, are not 5000 years old. The Advertiser
has not proven that the product as sold in its present form is similar to classical textual
preparation/s or has the effectiveness of each of the ingredients as is being claimed in the
advertisement. The CCC noted that Kumkumadi tailam, where kumkum is the main ingredient
which is only 10 mg per 10 gm of the product. The CCC considered this quantity to be too less
when compared with what is prescribed traditionally to provide the benefit as claimed for the
said ingredient/s. Furthermore, Saffron – 1mg per 10 gm, Lodhra – 71.3 mg per 10 gm, and
Manjishtha – 142 mg per 10 gm are exracts and not raw as used in traditional system and therefore
claims based on classical dosage forms are less relevant. While the advertiser in their response
assert about the benefits of each ingredient for their individual efficacy, no substantiation was
provided for the advertised product. No technical rationale was provided to show impact of the
quantities of saffron (1mg per 10 gm) and Kumkumadi tailam (10 mg per 10 gm) on the
performance of the products and the method/s that were used to retain its natural attributes. The
CCC noted that the advertiser has not provided any product efficacy data for their formulation
specific to the benefits attributed to the claimed ingredients such as curing of marks and
lightening of skin complexion.
Based on this assessment, the CCC concluded that the claims, “A fairness treatment formulated
with 5000 years of Ayurvedic wisdom” and “The rich blend of Saffron and Kumkumadi Tailam
is known to cure marks and lighten skin complexion”, were inadequately substantiated. The
claims are misleading by implication and exaggeration and are likely to lead to grave or
widespread disappointment in the minds of consumers. The website advertisement contravened
Chapters I.1, I.4 and I.5 of the ASCI Code. This complaint was UPHELD.
COMPANY: Hindustan Unilever Ltd
PRODUCT: Lever Ayush Whitening Toothpaste with rocksalt
Claims Objected to:
1. Formulated with 5000 years of Ayurvedic wisdom.
2. It contains Rock Salt (Sendha Namak),known since centuries as a powerful solution for
whitening of teeth
3. Contains Arimedas Tailam known to be extremely effective in making teeth healthy.
Complaint:
1. Reference to claims 1 to 3 please substantiate with claim support data. The claim
support data should not be internal or based on studies commissioned by Hindustan
Unilever.
2. Reference to claim 1 and 2; these are not generic claims and therefore should be
substantiated by independent data and not just be assertions.
3. Reference claims 2 and 3; is the effect same for everyone irrespective of genetic
conditions, lifestyle and gender. Please substantiate.
4. eference to claim 2 and 3; is the amount of the ingredients significant to make an impact
on the performance of the product as claimed? Is the efficacy data specific to the
benefits of the formulation attributable to the claimed ingredients provided?
5. Can the advertiser prove that the products sold in its present form is similar to textual
preparation/s or has the effectiveness of each and all of the ingredients as is being
claimed in the advertisement since the ingredients appear to have symbolic presence in
the product?
6. The name Ayush can confuse a consumer to think that it is certified by Ministry of
AYUSH (Ayurveda, Yoga and Naturopathy, Unani, Siddha and Homeopathy). Has
Ministry of AYUSH certified this product and permitted the advertisers to use the
name? If no, then it is grossly misleading.
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.
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the
complainant and forwarded the details of the complaint, verbatim, to the advertiser with a request
to respond to the same. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the
ASCI Secretariat which they availed and subsequently submitted their written response. The
advertiser in their response referred to 58 ayurvedic granthas which form the basis of Ayurveda
and are relied by the ayurvedic doctors or vaidyas. Basis authentic prescriptions recited in these
granthas, the Advertiser has developed the range of ayurvedic products. These 58 Ayurvedic
Granthas are duly recognized by the Drugs and Cosmetics Act 1940, which governs Ayurvedic
products in India, under First Schedule to the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940.
Advertiser further stated that the product is an Ayurvedic Proprietary Medicines and the key
ayurvedic ingredients in the Product as picked up basis text in authentic ayurvedic granthas and
their prescribed benefits as per ayurvedic text. Rock Salt (sendha namak): is prescribed in
Ayurveda as the healthiest form of salt and is known since centuries as a powerful solution for
whitening of teeth; Arimedas Tailam: is a classical formulation, made using 38 natural herbs,
which are known to make teeth stronger and prevent tooth decay. As claim support data, the
advertiser provided Copy of product label along with product composition, extracts of the annual
report 2013-14 issued by the Ministry of AYUSH, extracts of the authentic ayurvedic texts for
Rock Salt (Sendha Namak) and Arimedas Tailam, Letter from Arya Vaidya Pharmacy
(Coimbatore) Limited confirming presence of ayurvedic ingredients in the Product, Letter from
a researcher in Ayurveda, certifying that the ingredients in the Product are from ancient ayurvedic
text and the Product is capable of delivering the benefits of such ingredients.
The claim support data was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC viewed the
website advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response as well as the opinion of
Technical expert presented at the meeting.
The CCC observed that the claim refers to 5000 years of ayurvedic wisdom whereas the
Ayurvedic texts being referred in the advertiser’s response, are not 5000 years old. Advertiser
has not proven that the product as sold in its present form is similar to classical textual
preparation/s or has the effectiveness of each of the ingredients as is being claimed in the
advertisement.
The CCC noted that the claims based on tradition of Ayurveda, support from traditional
practitioners, validation of Arya Vaidya Pharmacy and such are not relevant as the ingredients
Rock Salt is 1mg per 10 gm and Arimedas Tailam is 5 mg per 10 gm. Quantity of these
constituents of the formulation are practically negligible to give claimed benefits and such
meagre quantities are not justifiable. While the advertiser in their response assert about the
benefits of each ingredient for their individual efficacy, no substantiation was provided to show
impact in terms of the quantities of Rock salt (1mg per 10 gm) and Arimedas Tailam (5 mg per
10 gm) on the performance of the advertised product and the method/s that were used to retain
its natural attributes. The CCC noted that the advertiser has not provided any product efficacy
data for their formulation specific to the benefits attributable to the claimed ingredients such as
whitening of teeth and making the teeth healthy.
Based on this assessment, the CCC concluded that the claims, “Formulated with 5000 years of
Ayurvedic wisdom”, “It contains Rock Salt (Sendha Namak), known since centuries as a
powerful solution for whitening of teeth”, and “Contains Arimedas Tailam known to be
extremely effective in making teeth healthy”, were inadequately substantiated. The claims are
misleading by implication and exaggeration and are likely to lead to grave or widespread
disappointment in the minds of consumers. The website advertisement contravened Chapters I.1,
I.4 and I.5 of the ASCI Code. This complaint was UPHELD.
COMPANY: Pankajakasthuri Herbals India (P) Ltd.
PRODUCT: Pankaj Kasturi Breathe Easy
Claims objected to:
1. A combination of 15 Herbs and natural ingredients in specific composition has been
formulated by us.
2. It’s unique and time tested traditional yet Ayurvedic formula harnesses phyto nutrients and
antioxidants like xanthones which helps building immunity, thereby improving the ability to
breathe well.
3. The herbal formulation is completely safe and is without any side effects.
Objection:
1. Reference to claims1 - 3 please substantiate with claim support data.The claim support data
should not be internal or based on studies commissioned by PankajKasturi.
2. Is the amount of the 15 unique herbsphyto nutrients and antioxidants like xanthones,
significant to make an impact on the performance of the product as claimed? Is the efficacy
data specific to the benefits of the formulation attributable to the claimed ingredients
provided?
3. Can the advertiser prove that the product as sold in its present form has the effectiveness of
each and all of the ingredients as is being claimed in the advertisement since the ingredients
appear to have symbolic presence in the product?
4. Does it have approval from Ministry of AYUSH? Please substantiate.
5. Reference to claim 1 it states, formulated by us whereas claim 2 mentions, Its unique and
time tested traditional yet Ayurvedic formula both the statements are contradictory.
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.
Link of Ad: http://www.pankajakasthuri.in/otc/pankajakasthuri-breathe-eazy
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the
complainant and forwarded the details of the complaint, verbatim, to the advertiser with a
request to respond to the same. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing
with the ASCI Secretariat which they did not avail, but submitted their written response. The
advertiser argued that the content under complaint is the product description on their website
and not any form of advertisement for the product.
As claim support data, the advertiser provided a copy of the drug license issued by the
Department of Ayush, Government of Kerala for the product, Clinical trial reports for effect
of the product in patients suffering from cold, cough, and breathing difficulties, Monograph on
the product, and Copy of Toxicity studies on the product.
The claim support data was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC viewed the
website advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response as well as the opinion of
Technical expert presented at the meeting. As per the CCC, ASCI Code's definition of
Advertising states that "Any communication which in the normal course would be recognized
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 vide product listing on the website,
paid or unpaid, has to be considered as Advertising.
The CCC observed that as per the composition of the tablets, it had 14 ingredients and not 15
as claimed. As per the quoted study, the product appeared to have benefit in case of bronchial
asthma; However it was incorrect to make absolute claims regarding safety / efficacy of the
product such as “completely safe and without any side effects” since as per the data submitted,
10% volunteers had dropped out of the study and 57% of the volunteers did experience
hyperacidity and related symptoms.
Based on this assessment, the CCC concluded that the claims, “A combination of 15 Herbs and
natural ingredients in specific composition has been formulated by us”, “Its unique and time
tested traditional yet Ayurvedic formula harnesses phyto nutrients and antioxidants like
xanthones which helps building immunity, thereby improving the ability to breathe well”, and
“The herbal formulation is completely safe and is without any side effects”, were inadequately
substantiated and are misleading by exaggeration.
The website advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint
was UPHELD
COMPANY: Hindustan Unilever Ltd.
PRODUCT: Lever Ayush Antimarks Turmeric Faeccream
Claims Objected to:
1. A skin care treatment formulated with 5000 years of Ayurvedic wisdom from the
'granthas'. 2. The purifying properties of Turmeric (haldi) are known to enhance
complexion
3. Kumkumadi Tailam is known to cure marks.
Complaint:
Objection:
1. Reference to claims 1-3 please substantiate with claim support data. The claim support
data should not be internal or based on studies commissioned by Hindustan Unilever.
2. Reference to claim 1-3; these are not generic claims and therefore should be
substantiated by independent data and not just be assertions.
3. Reference to claims 2 and 3; is the amount of the ingredients particularly Kumkumadi
Tailam significant to make an impact on the performance of the product as claimed?
Kumkumadi Tailam is a very expensive oil. Is the quantity used significant to ‘cure
marks’ as claimed? Is the efficacy data specific to the benefits of the formulation
attributable to the claimed ingredients provided?
4. Can the advertiser prove that the product as sold in its present form is similar to textual
preparation/s or has the effectiveness of each and all of the ingredients as is being
claimed in the advertisement since the ingredients appear to have symbolic presence in
the product?
5. The name Ayush can confuse a consumer to think that it is certified by Ministry of
AYUSH (Ayurveda, Yoga and Naturopathy, Unani, Siddha and Homeopathy). Has
Ministry of AYUSH certified this product and permitted the advertisers to use the
name? If no, then it is grossly misleading.
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.”
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the
complainant and forwarded the details of the complaint, verbatim, to the advertiser with a request
to respond to the same. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the
ASCI Secretariat which they availed and subsequently submitted their written response. The
advertiser in their response referred to 58 ayurvedic granthas which form the basis of Ayurveda
and are relied upon by the ayurvedic doctors or vaidyas. Basis authentic prescriptions recited in
these granthas, the Advertiser has developed the range of ayurvedic products. Advertiser further
stated that these 58 Ayurvedic Granthas are duly recognized by the Drugs and Cosmetics Act
1940. The product is an Ayurvedic Proprietary Medicine and the key ayurvedic ingredients in
the Product as picked up basis text in authentic ayurvedic granthas and their prescribed benefits
as per ayurvedic text. Turmeric is prescribed in Ayurveda for purification and also well known
for its antiseptic and healing properties. Kumkumadi tailam is a unique blend of 14 (fourteen)
herbs and oil, formulated to cure marks, lighten skin colour and improve skin’s quality. The
reference of Turmeric and benefits of Turmeric in treating the skin related issues is also found in
Atharvaveda, the 5000 years old and first ayurvedic grantha. As claim support data, the advertiser
provided Copy of product label along with product composition, extracts of the authentic
ayurvedic texts for Turmeric and Kumkumadi Tailam, extract of Atharvaveda, Letter from Arya
Vaidya Pharmacy (Coimbatore) Limited confirming presence of ayurvedic ingredients in the
Product and their benefits, Letter from a researcher in Ayurveda, certifying that the ingredients
in the Product are from ancient ayurvedic text and the Product is capable to delivering the benefits
of such ingredients. The claim support data was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The
CCC viewed the website advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response as well as the
opinion of Technical expert presented at the meeting.
The CCC observed that the claim refers to 5000 years of ayurvedic wisdom whereas the
advertiser did not provide details regarding the specific scriptures that are 5000 years old since
Ayurvedic texts being referred in the advertiser’s response, is not 5000 years old. Advertiser has
not proven that the product as sold in its present form is similar to textual preparation/s or has the
effectiveness of each and all of the ingredients as is being claimed in the advertisement since the
ingredients appear to have symbolic presence in the product. A skin care treatment formulated
with 5000 years of Ayurvedic wisdom from the Granthas is irrelevant as the ingredients used,
Kumkumadi Tailam 10 mg per 10 gm is much less, practically negligible, as against prescribed
in the texts Grantha to have claimed effect as an ingredient. Similarly quantity of Turmeric
(haldi) is only 10 mg as extract per 10 gm, for claimed purifying properties to enhance
complexion. Turmeric is used raw as described in Ayurveda for its varnya – complexion
promoting activity. Effect of the extracted material in the said quantity is not justifiable for its
complexion promoting efficacy.
The claims based on tradition of Ayurveda, support from traditional practitioners, validation of
Arya Vaidya Pharmacy and such are not relevant as the ingredients Turmeric is 10 mg per 10
gm, and Kumkumadi Tailam 10 mg per 10 gm. Quantity of these constituents of the formulation
are practically negligible to give claimed benefits. The ingredient content is miniscule which is
misleading by quantum of ingredient present. While the advertiser in their response stated
benefits of each ingredient for their individual efficacy no substantiation was provided in terms
of quantities of Turmeric (10 mg per 10 gm.) and Kumkumadi Tailam (10 mg per 10 gm) used,
which is significant to make an impact on the performance of the product as claimed, and the
method/s that were used to retain its natural attributes. The CCC noted that the advertiser has not
provided any product efficacy data for their formulation specific to the benefits attributable to
the claimed ingredients.
Based on this assessment, the CCC concluded that the claims, “A skin care treatment formulated
with 5000 years of Ayurvedic wisdom from the granthas”, and “The purifying properties of
Turmeric (haldi) are known to enhance complexion”, and “Kumkumadi Tailam is known to cure
marks”, were inadequately substantiated.
The claims are misleading by implication and exaggeration and are likely to lead to grave or
widespread disappointment in the minds of consumers. The website advertisement contravened
Chapters I.1, I.4 and I.5 of the ASCI Code. This complaint was UPHELD.
COMPANY: Apcos Naturals
PRODUCT: Just Herbs
Claims Objected to:
1. Our Fair’e skin lightening gel and A’ffair skin lightening cream help in getting rid of
dark spot and patches
2. The herbs present in them detoxify the blood and boost circulation to fade freckles and
skin discolorations thus making the skin tone more even toned and giving it a lighter
appearance
Complaint
1. Reference to claims 1 and 2; please substantiate with claim support data. The data
should not be internal or based on studies commissioned by Apcos Naturals.
2. Reference to claim 2; which are the herbs present in them? Is the amount of herbs
significant to make an impact on the performance of the product as claimed? Is the
efficacy data specific to the benefits of the formulation attributable to the claimed
ingredient provided?
3. Reference to claim 2; can the advertiser prove that the product as sold in its present form
has the effectiveness of the herbs as is being claimed in the advertisement since the
ingredient appears to have symbolic presence in the product?
4. The advertiser needs to substantiate the claims with third party data as they are specific
to this product and not GENERIC.
5. The post begins with “Many of our customers ask us if we have something to make their
skin fair and we say that we do not support it. However we do have something for skin
lightening?! This is grossly misleading the consumer as the product is definitely
working towards giving a fairer skin. It claims “giving a lighter appearance? “Skin
lightening? Which are alternative words for skin fairness.
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.
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the
complainant and forwarded the details of the complaint, verbatim, to the advertiser with a request
to respond to the same. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the
ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser had, however, not responded to ASCI’s request. The CCC noted
that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the prescribed due date for this
complaint. The CCC viewed the Facebook advertisement. The CCC observed that the advertiser
did not submit any product specific details such as composition / licence / pack artwork or
samples and approval from the concerned regulatory authorities for all the claims being made in
the advertisement. Upon careful consideration of the complaint, and in the absence of any
comments or response from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “Our Fair’s skin
lightening gel and Affair skin lightening cream help in getting rid of dark spot and patches”, was
not substantiated with product efficacy data.
Claim, “The herbs present in them detoxify the blood and boost circulation to fade freckles and
skin discolorations thus making the skin tone more even toned and giving it a lighter appearance”,
was not substantiated with any evidence of the ingredients present in the product and with
specific benefits attributable to the ingredients responsible for the claimed efficacy of the product.
The claims are misleading by exaggeration and are likely to lead to grave or widespread
disappointment in the minds of consumers. The Facebook advertisement contravened Chapters
I.1, I.4 and I.5 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.
COMPANY: Hope Ayurvedic Medicines Pvt Ltd
Complaint:
The advertisement says that it is a patented Medicine by government of India & can be used In
all types of cancer, hiv/ aids, all blood Related diseases, renal diseases, depression, Migrain pain,
geriatric blood diseases, to Increase platelets in dengue & all those Diseases which are not relived
by any other Medicines except the bone diseases.
This is totally false to say that government of India has awarded any patent for Ayurvedic drug
which is useful in all the Conditions, hence it is a false advertisement. And a clear case of
misleading common people In the name of ayurved as well as patent by Government of India.
This advt is published in today's loksatta, marathi daily from Mumbai edition.
Having stated that the medicine is patented by government of India for such a veriety of diseases.
The claim cannot be supported by website /email & telephone call to given number does not
yield any information. Please take the appropriate action.
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the
complainant and forwarded the details of the complaint, verbatim, to the advertiser with a request
to respond to the same. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the
ASCI Secretariat which they did not avail, but submitted their written response. The advertiser
had stated in their response that their medicines are herbal and 100% organic and 100% natural.
These medicines do not have any types of steroids and metallic dust. The medicines being very
effective on all types of claimed diseases, have been beneficial for patients. The advertisement
nowhere claims cure for diseases nor does it violate Drugs and Magic Remedies Act. Ayurved
being an Indian culture, this culture is used more outside India.
Upon viewing the print advertisement, examining the complaint and the response given by the
advertiser, the CCC observed that the advertiser’s response has only assertions about their
medicines. Advertiser did not provide copy of product label, copy of Product approval / FDA
license, Product composition details, evidence of the ingredients present in the product, nor any
scientific data or any study done with the product that demonstrated the effectiveness of the
medicine for the claimed diseases. In the absence of claim support data, the CCC concluded that
the claims (in Marathi) as translated in English, “can be used in all types of Cancer, HIV/AIDS,
all Blood related diseases, Renal diseases, Depression, Migraine pain, Geriatric blood diseases,
to
Increase platelets in dengue, and all those Diseases which are not relived by any other
Medicines”, were not substantiated with evidence of product efficacy, and are misleading by
implication that this medicine works even when all other treatment fails.
Claim, “Patented medicine by Government of India”, was not substantiated with supporting
evidence of Government of India having granted patent for their ayurvedic medicines, and is
misleading by exaggeration.
These claims also exploits the consumers’ lack of knowledge and are likely to lead to grave or
widespread disappointment in the minds of consumers. The advertisement contravened Chapters
I.1, I.4 and I.5 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.
COMPANY: Hindustan Unilever Ltd.
PRODUCT: Pepsodent Toothpaste
Claims Objected to:
1. New Pepsodent Germicheck Cavity Protection
2. 12 hr Germi check
3. Aap apna toothpaste badaliye
Complaint:
1. Reference to claims 1 and 2, please substantiate the claim with claim support data. The
claim support data should not be based on internal studies or studies commissioned by
Hindustan Unilever Ltd.
2. Reference claim 1;as per ASCI guidelines of claiming New/Improved, The words New
/Improved must specify what aspect of the product/service is new or improved - viz the
product's utility, function, product design, package design, etc. Also, the word “new?,
“improved? or an 'improvement' of a product may be used in advertisements only for a
period of one (1) year from the time the new or improved product/service has been
launched/introduced in the market.
3. Using a child in the advertisement and then claiming “hunger mitane ke liye chocolate
khaane ka bahana toh nahi badlega. Aap apna toothpaste badaliye? is promoting the
unhealthy habit of eating chocolates for satiating hunger among children. Pepsodent is
also giving free chocolate with their pack. This will lure kids to force their parents into
buying the product. It will not stop at one chocolate but result into children consuming
calorie dense, nutrient poor food. Since the advertisement says “hunger mitane ke liye
chocolate khaane ka bahana toh nahi badlega? children will indulge into persuading
parents to buy chocolates and ultimately lead to cavities.
4. Pepsodent on one hand states that ‘hunger mitane ke liye chocolate khaane ka bahana
toh nahi badlega.’ And then gives a chocolate bar ‘Free’ with the toothpaste which
claims Germicheck+ cavity protection. This is absolutely unethical on the part of
HUL. The company is indirectly promoting the message that children can continue to
eat chocolates (the company offers free chocolates) as they are protected by Pepsodent
‘Germicheck+ cavity protection’. This is irresponsible and unhealthy marketing.
In Feb 2018, 9 food companies signed MoU with FSSAI pledging their support not to
advertise junk food to children. HUL is one of them.
5. At a time when Government of India, is making all efforts for reduction of HFSS foods
in children, by proposing the prohibition of junk foods in school canteens, HUL is
completely negating these efforts, by its insensitive, irresponsible marketing techniques.
Informatively the list of 12 foods proposed to be banned in school canteens includes
chocolates!! In February 2018, FSSAI has released a draft notification addressing this
issue.
6. Reference to claim 3; the advertisement violates the ASCI clause which states ,‘the
advertisement does not unfairly denigrate, attack or discredit other products advertisers
or advertisements directly or by implication and the comparisons are factual, accurate
and capable of substantiation’.
According to us, the advertisement contravenes Chapter 1.1, 1.4, 4.1 (c), 4.1(e) of ASCI code
and ASCI guidelines of validity and duration of claiming new/improved.
CCC RECOMMENDATION: NOT UPHELD
The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the
complainant and forwarded the details of the complaint, verbatim, to the advertiser with a request
to respond to the same. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the
ASCI Secretariat which they availed, and subsequently submitted their written response.
Claim - “New Pepsodent Germicheck Cavity Protection” - Advertiser stated that New Pepsodent
Germicheck was introduced in January 2018. This toothpaste formulation has the proprietary
technology of Cetyl Pyridinium Chloride (CPC) - Clay which is being used for the first time. The
change in product formulation has been communicated on the product packaging as “New
Formula”, and the ingredient list features the new ingredients - Natural Clay and Cetyl
Pyridinium Chloride (CPC).
Advertiser provided a copy of the product label artwork, and a video on CPC Clay Technology.
For the product efficacy, the advertiser stated that Pepsodent Germicheck is formulated with
Calcium Carbonate and Sodium Monofluoro Phosphate equivalent to 1000 ppm of fluoride for
cavity protection. Fluoride helps strengthen teeth by enhancing remineralization and reducing
the effect of demineralization. Advertiser provided literature reference on caries prevention by
fluoride.
Claim - “12 hr Germi check” - Advertiser stated that the efficacy of formulation in providing
protection against germs for 12 hours is proven through the study - `Anti bacterial effect of a
Novel CPC-Clay containing toothpaste’. This study showed that toothpaste with 1.5% CPC-
Clay had comparable antibacterial activity to a marketed toothpaste with 0.3% Triclosan at 12
hour time point.
Advertiser provided a report on Anti-bacterial effect of Toothpaste containing 1.5%
Cetylpyridinium ChlorideClay (CPC-Clay). The 1.5% CPC-clay toothpaste had significantly
lower levels of bacteria present 12 hours post brushing as compared to the negative control
toothpaste and parity to positive control.
Based on the advertiser’s response with the supporting data provided, the CCC concluded that
the claims, “New Pepsodent Germicheck Cavity Protection”, and “12 hr Germi check”, were
substantiated.
Claim – “Aap apna toothpaste badaliye” – Advertiser stated that this statement is more like a call
to action wherein consumers are called to try their new proprietary technology. The CCC did
not consider this statement to be disparaging.
As for the objection raised against free chocolate bar being given along with the 300g pack of
the product, the advertiser stated that this is part of a one off promotional offer which was
exclusively run at one of the select channels in modern trade. The CCC did not agree with the
complainant’s objection that the advertisement is against the pledge with respect to not
advertising junk food to children since the advertisement is not of a chocolate but is of a
toothpaste. Marketing of chocolates is not prohibited and presenting a toothpaste that helps
address cavity problems by providing a 12 hour protection was not objectionable.
In this context the CCC did not consider this promotional offer to be in contravention of the
ASCI code. The complaint was NOT UPHELD.
COMPANY: Institute of Advance Network Technology (IANT institute)
Claims Objected To:
1. 100% Job Guarantee*
2. India’s No. 1 Hardware, Networking, Software, Cyber security, Ethical Hacking &
Disruptive Technologies Training Institute.
3. Earn a Job starting from Rs. 1,20,000 to 6,00,000* as per courses.
Complaint:
Our objections:
1. Please substantiate claims 1, 2 and 3 with claim support data. The claim support data
should not be internal or based on studies commissioned by IANT Institute of Advance
Network Technology.
2. The terms and conditions associated with claims 1 and 3 are not given. Hence it is
misleading by means of omission.
3. Ref. to claim 2, Is there data to show how IANT compares with other Training
Institutes? Is the claim substantiated with any market survey data or verifiable
comparative data of advertiser’s services with other competitive services? Is there any
third party validation to prove these claims? Is the credibility and authenticity of the
certifying bodies well established?
4. Ref. to claim 3, is Rs. 1,20,000 minimum amount earned after completing any course
with IANT? If yes, Please substantiate.
5. The advertisement violates ASCI Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions
and Programs 2(a) and 3 of ASCI code.
According to us, the advertisement contravenes Chapter 1.1, 1.4 and Guidelines for Advertising
of Educational Institutions and Programs 2(a) and 3 of ASCI code. Action to be taken: We
propose that the advertisement should be immediately withdrawn.
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the
complainant and forwarded the details of the complaint, verbatim, to the advertiser with a request
to respond to the same. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the
ASCI Secretariat which they did not avail, but submitted their written response. As the response
was inadequate, ASCI requested the advertiser to provide supporting data for the claims made.
Advertiser did not provide this data in time for the CCC. Upon viewing the print advertisement,
examining the complaint and the response given by the advertiser, the
CCC observed that the advertiser’s response has only assertions about their institute and the
programmes/trainings offered by them.
Claim – “100% Job Guarantee*” – Advertiser stated that the said claim is conditional which is
explained to the student before starting the course. There are 6 global certification examinations
which the student needs to pass, and also they need to attend 80% of the scheduled lectures. The
students who fulfill these criterion are given a job. Advertiser provided relevant extract of the
Brochure of their institute.
In the absence of claim support data, the CCC concluded that claim, “100% Job Guarantee”, was
not substantiated with authentic supporting data such as detailed list of students who have been
placed through their Institute, contact details of students for verification, enrolment forms and
appointment letters received by the students, nor any independent audit or verification certificate.
The claim is misleading by exaggeration and is likely to lead to grave or widespread
disappointment in the minds of consumers.
Claim – “India’s No.1 Hardware, Networking, software, cyber security, ethical hacking and
disruptive technologies training institute”, - In response to this objection, the advertiser stated
that The Computing
Technology Industry Association (CompTIA) has declared the advertiser’s institute as No.1 in
whole of Asia Pacific Region (APAC) for highest number of students passing global certification
exam. RedHat APAC, a leading high end technology solution provider has also conferred the
APAC No.1 award to the advertiser’s institute. Advertiser provided a copy of the award
certificate of RedHat APAC, News coverage of the institute with photographs of the award
function displayed on WhatsApp.
The CCC observed that the Advertiser did not provide a copy of the award certificate of
CompTIA, the details of the process as to how the selection was done i.e. survey methodology,
details of survey data, criteria used for evaluation, questionnaires used, names of other similar
colleges that were part of the survey and the outcome of the survey, and the credibility and
authenticity of these certifying bodies. In the absence of claim support data, the CCC concluded
that the claim, “India’s No.1 Hardware, Networking, software, cyber security, ethical hacking
and disruptive technologies training institute”, was not substantiated and is misleading by
exaggeration and is likely to lead to grave or widespread disappointment in the minds of
consumers.
Claim – “Earn a Job starting from Rs.1,20,000 to Rs. 6,00,000* as per courses” - Advertiser
stated that students can earn these per annum salaries based on the courses they choose. An
undergraduate student earns Rs. 10000 pm or 1.2 lacs per annum, while an Engineering students
opting gets Rs.50000/- salary.
The CCC observed that the advertiser did not provide supporting evidence to prove that students
were offered the claimed salary packages, with detailed list of students who have been provided
placements through their Institute, contact details of students for verification, and job offer letters
received by the students.
In the absence of claim support data, the CCC concluded that the claim, “Earn a Job starting from
Rs.1,20,000 to Rs. 6,00,000* as per courses”, was not substantiated and is misleading by
exaggeration and is likely to lead to grave or widespread disappointment in the minds of
consumers. The print advertisement contravened
Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters, I.1, I.4
and I.5 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD
COMPANY: Seniority Ltd.
PRODUCT: Aayu Copper Bottle
Claims:
1. The Aayu - pure copper bottle aids weight loss, boosts cardiac health, slows down
ageing and fights cancer.
2. It also kills all microrganisms & prevents spread of water borne disease
Objections:
1. Reference to claims 1and 2 please substantiate with claim support data. The claim
support data should not be internal or based on studies commissioned by Aayu.
2. Are these the properties of copper or specific to the product?
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.
We approached the concerned e portal Senority.in. They informed us that they would respond to
our mail within 48 hours i.e. by 16 July. We have not received any response from them. We
therefore request ASCI to process our complaint. Attached is the email correspondence with them
along with the copy of the advertisement.”
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the
complainant and forwarded the details of the complaint, verbatim, to the advertiser with a request
to respond to the same. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the
ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser had, however, not responded to ASCI’s request. The CCC noted
that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the prescribed due date for this
complaint. The CCC viewed the Facebook advertisement and upon careful consideration of the
complaint, and in the absence of any comments or response from the advertiser, the CCC
concluded that the claims, “The Aayu - pure copper bottle aids weight loss, boosts cardiac health,
slows down ageing and fights cancer”, and “It also kills all microrganisms & prevents spread of
water borne disease”, were not substantiated with any scientific rationale or technical tests. The
claims are misleading by exaggeration and are likely to lead to grave or widespread
disappointment in the minds of consumers. The Facebook advertisement contravened Chapters
I.1, I.4 and I.5 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.
COMPANY: Hindustan Unilever Ltd
PRODUCT: Sunsilk Thick and Long
Complaint:
Description: The ad begins with a few friends taking Alia Bhatt for a surprise after her shoot.
They ask her to style her hair. Alia shows them different hair styles but her friends reject them.
Voiceover about the product is played- Sunsilk Thick and Long with Keratin yogurt gives you
2x thicker hair. The ad ends with the friends taking Alia to her surprise Birthday party. The
tagline “Jab baal ho thick, any style karo pick? Is played. Language: Hindi
Claims:
1. With keratin yogurt
2. 2x thicker hair
Objections:
1. Please substantiate claims 1 and 2 with claim support data. The claim support data
should not be internal or based on studies commissioned by Hindustan Unilever
Limited.
2. Reference to claim 1; is the amount of ingredients significant to make an impact on the
performance of the product as claimed? Is the efficacy data specific to the benefits of
the formulation attributable to the claimed ingredients provided?
3. Reference to claim 1; can the advertiser prove that the product as sold in its present form
has the effectiveness of each and all of the ingredients as is being claimed in the
advertisement since the ingredients appear to have symbolic presence in the product?
4. Reference to claim 2; the disclaimer says, “Based on lab test with Sunsilk Thick &
Long shampoo and conditioner vs. unclean hair.? How can comparison be made
between unclean hair and hair which is shampooed and conditioned? This is a grossly
misleading comparison.
5. A disclaimer appears for duration of less than 4 seconds. This violates the ASCI
Guidelines for Disclaimers.
6. Actress Alia Bhatt endorses the product. As per the ASCI Guidelines for Celebrities in
Advertising, a Celebrity should do due diligence to ensure that all description, claims
and comparisons made in the advertisements they appear in or endorse are capable of
being objectively ascertained and capable of substantiation and should not mislead or
appear deceptive. The claims made by the celebrity (Alia Bhatt) in this advertisement
violate this clause of the ASCI guidelines. Can the advertiser show evidence that the
actress Alia Bhatt has done due diligence and that she confirms with all the claims made
in the advertisement?
7. The claim made by the advertiser “With keratin yogurt? is not generic but specific. The
advertiser has to substantiate the claim
According to us, the advertisement contravenes Chapter 1.1 and 1.4 of ASCI Code and the ASCI
Guidelines for Disclaimers and Celebrities in Advertising. Action to be taken: We propose that
the advertisement should be immediately withdrawn.
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the
complainant and forwarded the details of the complaint, verbatim, to the advertiser with a request
to respond to the same. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the
ASCI Secretariat which they did not avail, but submitted their written response. The CCC viewed
the TVC and considered the advertiser’s response. For the objection raised against the claim,
“Sunsilk thick and long with keratin yogurt”, the advertiser stated that the formulation contains
hydrolyzed keratin and yogurt extract. Advertiser provided a copy of the product label.
The claim, “2x thicker looking hair”, is made based on an Image Analysis (IA) data which proved
that hair washed with Sunsilk shampoo and conditioner showed two times higher visible hair
volume as compared to unwashed/unclean hair. The product claim is not associated with presence
of keratin yogurt and is made basis use of shampoo and conditioner which gives volume to hair
on washing when compared with unwashed/unclean hair. The benefit of two times thicker
looking hair is attributed to the product as a whole and not to any particular ingredient in its
formulation. Advertiser provided a copy of the Image Analysis report.
Based on the advertiser’s response with the supporting data provided, the CCC concluded that
the claims, “Sunsilk thick and long with keratin yogurt”, and “2x thicker looking hair”, were
substantiated.
However the disclaimer, “Based on lab test with Sunsilk Thick and Long shampoo and
conditioner vs unclean hair”, qualifying the comparative claim, “2x thicker looking hair”, was
not positioned in close proximity of the claim.
The disclaimers were not legible and were not in the same language as the audio of the TVC
(Hindi). The hold duration of the disclaimer on the screen was not for more than 4 seconds.
The TVC contravened Clauses 4 (I) (V), (VII) and (X) of ASCI Guidelines for Disclaimers. This
complaint was UPHELD.
For the objection raised against the use of Celebrity (Alia Bhatt) in the TVC, the advertiser stated
that the celebrity had done her due diligence with respect to the credibility of the claims shown
in the TVC. The CCC observed that the advertiser did not provide any evidence to show that the
celebrity had done due diligence prior to endorsement, to ensure that all description, claims and
comparisons made in the TVC are capable of substantiation, nor any Testimonials, or any
evidence of the consent of the celebrity for the product efficacy claims. This contravenes Clauses
(c), (d) of the Guidelines for Celebrities in Advertising. This complaint was UPHELD.
COMPANY: Cadila Healthcare Ltd
PRODUCT: Nutralite Mayo
Claim Objected To:
“Healthier”
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in
the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI
Secretariat which they did not avail. Further on the advertiser’s request, they were provided with
an opportunity to discuss their submission via telecon, at which time the advertiser sought for
Informal Resolution (IR) of the complaint. However, they did not submit the necessary
undertaking. Therefore the complaint was taken forward for CCC deliberations. The CCC
viewed the print advertisement and observed that the advertiser did not submit any product
specific details such as composition / pack artwork or samples and FSSAI approval. In the
absence of specific comments with claim support data, the CCC concluded that the product
claiming to be “Healthier”, was not substantiated with comparative technical data or scientific
rationale and was misleading by ambiguity, implication and omission of the mention of the basis
of comparison. The claims is likely to lead to grave or widespread disappointment in the minds
of consumers the advertisement contravened Chapters I.1, I.4 and I.5 of the ASCI Code. The
complaint was UPHELD.
COMPANY: Nestle India Ltd
PRODUCT: Nestle Ceregrow
Claims objected to:
1. Each bowl full of iron and nutrients
2. Tumne pet bharkekhiladia but muscle bharke nahi
3. She feeds her to stomach full and not immunity full
Complaint:
The advt begins with a father feeding his child and showing off proudly to his wife on video chat
to which his wife Tumne pet bharke khiladia but muscle bharkenahi. The same lady is seen in a
lab coat in the next scene where a mother asks her that despite feeding her daughter properly she
falls sick to which she says that she feeds her to stomach full and not immunity full. The doctor
says that kids stomach is small as a fist so it is easy to fill it but not easy to provide proper
nutrition. She advises the use of Nestle Ceregrow with each bowl full of iron and nutrients.
Objections:
1. Please substantiate the claim with claim support data. The claim support data should not be
internal or based on studies commissioned by Nestle India Ltd.
2. Is the amount of iron and nutrients significant to make an impact on the performance of the
product as claimed? Was the efficacy data specific to the benefits of the formulation
attributable to the claimed ingredients provided?
3. Can the advertiser prove that the product as sold in its present form has the effectiveness of
each and all of the ingredients as is being claimed in the advertisement since the ingredients
appear to have symbolic presence in the product?
4. Claims 2 and 3 imply that if Nestle ceregrow is not given than the child will not have muscle
bharke and immunity full feeds. Can the advertiser substantiate that another foods given by
the father and mother as shown in the TVC are not adequate?
5. Claims 2 and 3 Is the advertiser trying to portray the product as a meal replacement? As per
ASCI guidelines for Food and Beverages and as per a FSSAI Draft Notification on
Advertisements and Claims Regulation, 2018, Advertisements in respect of a food product that
undermines the importance of healthy lifestyles or portrays the food product as a complete
replacement of normal meal are not permitted
6. The draft regulation non Advertisements and Claims Regulation, 2018 by FSSAI, also states,
that it shall specify the number of servings of the food per day for the claimed benefit. The
claim that a food has a certain nutritional or health attributes shall be scientifically
substantiated by validated methods of quantifying the ingredient or substance that is the basis
for the claim.
7. Is the doctor in the advertisement genuine and unpaid ? Please substantiate.
8. The Disclaimer is not legible. According to us, the advertisement contravenes Chapter 1.1 and
1.4 of ASCI code, ASCI code for Disclaimer, ASCI code Guidelines for Food and Beverages
and Draft notification of FSSAI on Advertisements and Claims Regulation, 2018.
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the
complainant and forwarded the details of the complaint, verbatim, to the advertiser with a request
to respond to the same. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the
ASCI Secretariat which they availed and subsequently submitted their written response.
Advertiser in their response stated that a bowl of Ceregrow (i.e. 50g Ceregrow powder+ 130ml
of water) is a source of 15 vitamins & minerals. The 15 nutrients claimed meets the claim
condition mentioned in the Codex Guidelines on Nutrition and Health Claims along with the
draft claim guidelines by FSSA1. Per serve of Ceregrow meets minimum 15% of the RDA
(Recommended Dietary Allowances) for children 2-5 years of age. One bowl of Ceregrow (50g)
provides 6.5g of protein which meets 39% of the daily requirements of 2-3 year old child and
32% of the daily requirements of 4-5 year old child. One serve of Ceregrow provides 2.25mg of
iron which meets 25% of the daily iron requirements of a 2- 3 year old child and 17% of the daily
requirement of a 4-5 year old child. The communication does not portray the product as a meal
replacement, but is recommended to be consumed as part of a varied balanced diet for a 2-5
year old child.
As claim support data, the advertiser provided Soft copy product Label along with product
Composition, Product Approval License from Regulatory Authority, Product analysis report,
Relevant extracts of National Institute of Nutrition, 2004, Dietetics, 7th Edition, Nutritional &
Food Requirements for Preschool Children, Nutrition Science, 6th Edition, Nutrition and Health
Claims, Indian Journal of Pediatrics, Literature references on Controlling Iron Deficiency
Anemia Through The Use of Home-fortified Complementary Foods, Nutrient requirements and
Recommended Dietary allowances for Indians, ICMR, 2010, and FSSAI (Claims and
advertisement) Regulations, 2018
The claim support data was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC viewed the TVC
advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response as well as the opinion of Technical
expert presented at the meeting. The CCC observed that the explanation for the claim of “Poora
Poshan” given by the Advertiser is contradictory. On one side they claim that Proteins are 38%
and Vitamins and Minerals are 15% of RDA for the age for which the product is made and not
100% RDA to justify the claim “Poora Poshan”. This is misleading because Consumer mothers
may think that one bowl is enough of daily nutrition of their child between 2 to 5 years. There
was no substantiation or indication in the TVC that the feeding by father or the mother whose
daughter falls ill, is lacking in muscle making Proteins or in Immunity giving vitamins and
minerals. The protagonist (nutritionist) mother seems to be presuming that the said feeding is
wrong. This too will misguide a consumer mother to feel that anything except Ceregrow is
unlikely to provide “poora poshan”. There was no clear guidance in the TVC or the Pack about
whether it is replacement or a supplement to normal food. The TVC implies that if Ceregrow is
not given than the child will not have “muscle bharke” and “immunity barke” feeds. The TVC
does not specify the number of servings of the food per day for the claimed benefit.
Based on this assessment, the CCC concluded that the claims, “Pet bharke to khila diya, par
muscle bharke nahi khilaya”, “Pet bharke toh khilati hogi par immunity bharke nahi”, and
“Jiska har bowl hai bhara iron aur ghane poshan se”, were inadequately substantiated. The
claims are misleading by ambiguity and implication and are likely to lead to grave or widespread
disappointment in the minds of consumers. The disclaimers in the TVC were not in the same language as the audio of the TVC (Hindi).
The TVC contravened Chapters I.1, I.4 and I.5 of the ASCI Code and Clause 4 (I) of ASCI
Guidelines for Disclaimers as well as Guidelines for advertising of Food and Beverage products.
The complaint was UPHELD.
COMPANY: Kamla Kant & Company LLP
PRODUCT: Rajshree Pan Masala
Complaint:
Rajshree Industries widely advertises to promote the consumption of pan masala via various
media. The commercial shows people dancing and making merry with drums being played and
holi, Diwali being celebrated, across different regions of India. Even cricket match audience are
shown promoting the consumption of the product. This commercial runs for approximately 45
seconds.
1. The font size of the health hazard warning is too small. When compared to the main
text on the packaged product, the difference in the font size is about 300%. Also, more
area of the product packaging should be covered in health warnings.
2. The background contrast of the warning is too dull rendering the warning unreadable
by a consumer with reasonably good eyesight.
3. The advertisement jingle doesn't mention the health warning which does no good to the
visually handicapped as all they hear is "achcha swaad, masti ka saath".
As written in out complaint, it is about:
1. What is being shown on web portals which is accessible to anyone, anytime.
2. What is being shown on TV.
As regarding the web portals, you may kindly access the following link.
Rajshree Pan Masala new TV Ad
Now, I could also access the video clipping of the same advertisement played before the
audience of Bhopal in Cinepolis Aashima Mall, during the interval break, which illustrates the
different objections I have posed in my complaint.
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the
complainant and forwarded the details of the complaint, verbatim, to the advertiser with a request
to respond to the same. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the
ASCI Secretariat which they did not avail, but replied requesting for an extension of one week
to submit their response. 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 this extension. The
advertiser stated that they have followed standard guidelines for display of warning in the
advertisement. Advertiser provided a copy of CBFC certificate, and CBFC certified version of
the advertisement.
Upon carefully viewing the commercial provided by the advertiser, examining the complaint and
the response given by the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the hold duration of the disclaimer
on the screen was not for more than 4 seconds, and hence contravened Clause 4 (X) of ASCI
Guidelines for Disclaimers. The complaint was UPHELD.
COMPANY: Zydus Wellness Limited
PRODUCT: Nutralite
Claim:
“Nutralite is a Healthy Alternative to Butter”
Objection: “Nutralite advertises itself as a healthy alternative to butter. I bought this product
because I was convinced that Nutralite was a healthy substitute to butter. I did not realise that it
could be actually margarine. But on further research, I found that this might not be true and that
studies are not conclusive. This Harvard article for instance –
https://www.health.harvard.edu/staying-healthy/butter-vs-margarine.”
CCC RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the
complainant and forwarded the details of the complaint, verbatim, to the advertiser with a request
to respond to the same. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the
ASCI Secretariat which they did not avail. Further on the advertiser’s request, they were
provided with an opportunity to discuss their submission via telecon.
Advertiser stated in their response that the website communication compares butter vs margarine.
As claim support data, the advertiser provided an article from Havard Health Publishing on Butter
Vs Margarine, Article reference on Monounsaturated and Polyunsaturated Fat, and total fat, Pack
image, Laboratory test reports for comparison of Nutralite with Butter, and Articles published by
USFDA giving more insights on the comparison. The advertiser asserted that Nutralite is
Cholesterol Free, contains Omega -3, has no trans fats and contains Vitamins A, D & E. The
CCC viewed the website advertisement and considered the advertiser’s response. The CCC
observed that the advertiser did not submit any product specific details such as Composition and
Nutritional information / product sample / pack artwork, and FSSAI approval etc. The CCC
concluded that the claim, “Nutralite is a Healthy Alternative to Butter”, implying the advertised
product to be a better substitute for Butter was inadequately substantiated with comparative
technical data regarding the overall nutritional profile of the two compared products such as
saturated fats, transfats, total fats , calories etc. The claim is misleading by ambiguity and
exaggeration, and by omission of the basis of comparison. The claim is also likely to lead to
grave or widespread disappointment in the minds of consumers. The website advertisement
contravened Chapters I.1, I.4 and I.5 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.
COMPANY: Hindustan Unilever Limited
PRODUCT: Pure Derm Shampoo
NATURE OF COMPLAINT
Fast Track Complaint received against the TV Commercial, Print advertisement (in Dainik
Bhaskar), Facebook advertisement of “Hindustan Unilever Ltd – Pure Derm Shampoo”, from
Procter & Gamble Home Products Private Ltd.
Advertiser is making the following claims on print advertisements in their point of sale material:
On TV copies, Social Media (Facebook), and in other media touchpoints:
"100% tak Dandruff Aur Waapas Nahin Aayega"
Disclaimer: Purification from dirt, grease, and dandruff action at epidermal level. No visible
dandruff, with regular use. The impact of dandruff removal is dependent on the level of dandruff,
No visible dandruff with regular use of the product.
1. The alleged revised claim continues to contain the statement "wapas nahi aayega"
("never come back"), which was found misleading by ASCI in its earlier finding dated 28th
March, 2017, as the same connotes "dandruff elimination" and dandruff being a medical condition
cannot be eliminated by a cosmetic product. Further, ASCI had also found that the study provided
by advertiser did not substantiate the claim, as not all participants reached 'dandruff free' state.
Hence, advertiser has actually not addressed the issue of the claim implying "dandruff
elimination" as recommended by ASCI and continues to use an unsubstantiated misleading claim.
In this regard, we would like to submit that the Advertiser continues advertising its product as a
permanent remedy/ cure for dandruff by claiming that upon using 'never come back'. As accepted
by ASCI in its finding dated 28 March, 2018, that this is extremely misleading for a consumer of
average/ ordinary intelligence who is likely to mistake the product as a medical remedy for his
her dandruff problems.
2. The usage of modified "100% tak dandruff jayega" (`Upto 100% dandruff will go') is a
clear plagiarism and imitation of our claim, "Upto 100% Dandruff Free”. P&G has been
historically using its claim "Upto 100% Dandruff free" since the year 2006 and all our H&S TV
copies (hindi) all carry voiceover "rahiye 100 % tak dandruff free humesha" "100% dandruff
hataye" "100% tak dandruff mitaaye" "100% tak dandruff free", the plan is to claim plagiarism
by advertiser. Further, all our H&S bottle packaging carries the claim "Upto 100% Dandruff
Free". Hence, over the years our brand has built its equity basis this claim and have our consumers
associate H&S with this claim.
Please find attached the storyboards of H&S TVC's running since the year 2012 and screenshots
of H&S bottle packaging for your reference. In the present case, the modified claim "100% tak
dandruff jayega" is not only virtually identical to our claim, but also it has been extensively used
by us in our advertising/promotional materials and on our packaging. Attached is the copy of the
ASCI decision dated October, 2014 for your reference.
3. It may be noted that, even if the entire claim, is read together i.e. "100% tak dandruff
jayega aur wapas aayega" is self-contradictory and self-negating, as it says two things that cannot
both be true. On one hand it says that dandruff will go upto 100% and on the other it suggests that
dandruff will never come back. If dandruff is removed only upto 100% then the assumption that
it will come back.
4. We would like to submit that advertiser's product is not a permanent solution (like a
vaccination) against dandruff and at best, assuming but not admitting, only mitigates the
occurrence of dandruff”
IRP RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
Heard the Learned Representatives of ‘Procter & Gamble Home Products Private Ltd.’
represented by Ms. Sangmitra Sawant, Legal Counsel (Complainant) and ‘Hindustan Unilever
Ltd’, represented by Mr. Prasad Neginhal, GM Legal and Mr. Himanshu Jain, Legal Manager
(Advertisers) who are the manufacturers of ‘Pure Derm Shampoo’ at length. Perused all relevant
reports for justifying the Claim. Visually saw the TV Commercial, YouTube advertisement.
In the above matter the FTCP after a detailed hearing of both the Representatives of the
Complainant and the Advertiser, after visually seeing the Advertisement, and after perusal of all
Reports, had upheld the Complaint that “100% Tak Dandruff Jayega Aur Waapas Nahin Aayega”
was misleading by omission and ambiguity, hence the Advertisement was found to be in
contravention of Chapter 1.4 of the ASCI Code as well as ASCI Guidelines on disclaimer in
advertising.
The Representatives of the Advertiser repeated the very same arguments advanced before the
FTCP. It was also contended that digital advertisements are for small screens, hence disclaimer
font cannot be compared with print or television commercials.
FTCP had rightly concluded that the disclaimer should indicate the duration of use (daily for four
weeks) required to achieve “Upto 100% Dandruff removal” state. Even the font size of Disclaimer
has to be big enough to read and there is no excuse contending that the Mobile Screens are small.
If that be so the very objective of Disclaimer is lost.
It is absolutely clear from the records, the above Advertisement, especially, “100% tak Dandruff
Jayega Aur Waapas Nahin Aayega” is misleading by ambiguity, all the more because not all the
volunteers reached the “Dandruff Free” state even after four weeks of daily use shampoo.
Therefore, the adjective “Upto (“Tak”) is a critical descriptor which needs equal emphasis as that
of the claim “100%”. Furthermore, the font size in the Disclaimer in Digital Advertisement is very
small rendering it to be illegible.
Hence the Order of FTCP in the above matter is upheld with respect to the ASCI Guidelines on
disclaimers.
The present IRP request is totally devoid of any merit, hence stands dismissed.
COMPANY: Godrej Consumer Products Ltd
PRODUCT: Good knight Fabric Roll-On
NATURE OF COMPLAINT
Claims Objected to:
1. Kapdo pe ek do teen char no machhar biting ghar ke bahar
2. 100% natural
Complaint:
Objections:
1. Kindly substantiate claim 1 and 2 with claim support data from an independent agency.
2. Reference to claim 1, please substantiate with product efficacy data as to how application
of just four drops of the roll on the fabric can result in the claimed benefits.
3. Reference to claim 1, for what duration are the four drops of the roll on effective? Please
substantiate with claim support data.
4. Reference to claim 2, are there no added chemicals and stabilizers? If there are then it is
an omission and therefore misleading. 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.”
IRP RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
Heard the Learned Representatives of ‘Godrej Consumer Products Ltd’ represented by Mr. Mandar
Chandrachud, AVP Corporate Legal; Ms. Reena, GM (R&D); Mr. Ankur Kumar, VP-Marketing
and Ms. Mita Tanna, Manager
Corporate Legal (Advertisers) who are the manufacturers of ‘Goodknight fabric roll on’ at length.
No one appeared on behalf of Consumer Education and Research Centre (CERC). Visually saw
the TV Commercial of the Advertisement. Perused the full test Report of the Department Of
Zoology, Mohanlal Sukhadia University, Udaipur, State of Rajasthan.
The above Complaint was heard at length by CCC, wherein the CCC had upheld the Complaint
that the testing methodology does not substantiate the claim of “No Machar biting ghar ke bahar”
CCC also had upheld the Complaint that the Claim of “ingredients are 100% Natural”, holding that
two active ingredients form only 50% of the product, hence the said Claim was found to be
misleading by ambiguity, implication and omission of a mention that this claim is limited to only
the active ingredients.
After perusal of the Report, it is clear, that the test report is adequate to substantiate the claim in
part, namely if the subject is dressed with legs covered up to knees and arms covered upto elbow,
and four coin-sized dots are placed on the clothes on shoulders and legs areas of the clothes, there
is a significant reduction in landing and feeding of three types of mosquitoes. However, an
observation was also made regarding the control subject exposing more body surface area than the
test subject which could potentially provide better scores.
There is also no dispute that the Active Natural Ingredients constitutes only 50%. Hence the Claim
Of “100% Natural” is misleading by ambiguity, implication and omission therefore violates
Chapter 1.1 and 1.4 of ASCI Code.
Accordingly, the Orders of the CCC are upheld.
In view of the above, the review application is dismissed with an observation that the advertiser
has already made amendment for the depiction of child with full sleeved shirt and full length pant
and the tag line “Macchar ki har ghar ke bahar”. The advertiser also offered to state “100% Natural
Actives / 100% Natural Active ingredients”
COMPANY: Wipro Enterprises P. Ltd.
PRODUCT: Chandrika Hair Oil
NATURE OF COMPLAINT
The ad shows woman weight lifting using their hair. The one not using the Chandrika hair oil fails
the other wins. The ad is completely misleading. No one can lift such weight using hair. The ad is
completely illogical and senseless. And totally misleading.
IRP RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
Heard the Learned Representatives of ‘Wipro Enterprises P. Ltd.’ represented by Ms. Rovena
David, Manager Legal and Mr. Venkateshwaran Suresh, Chief Marketing Officer (Advertisers)
who are the manufacturers of ‘Chandrika Ayurvedic Hair Oil’ at length. The Complainant chose
not to attend the hearing. Visually saw the TV Commercial.
The Advertisement claims that by using the Ayurvedic Hair Oil known as “Chandrika Ayurvedic
Hair Oil”, it arrests hair fall and makes the hair thicker and stronger. In the advertisement, the
competitor is shown lifting the dumbbells with her hair without any breakage of hair, whereas the
rival competitor loses lot of hair and the hair also breaks while lifting the dumbbells
The above complaint was heard by CCC, after seeing the Advertisement, and after hearing the
Advertiser at length, the CCC found that the Advertiser could not substantiate the claim by any
data that by using the said Ayurvedic Hair Oil, the hair fall was arrested, the hair became thicker
and stronger. Hence the advertisement was found to be misleading by implication and
exaggeration, hence contravened Chapter 1.1and 1.4 of ASCI Code.
Even in IRP proceedings, the Advertiser could not produce any scientific data to substantiate the
claim that use of Chandrika Ayurvedic Hair Oil, would arrest hair fall, and it will make the hair
thicker. The study produced in these proceedings, indicates that the hair becomes stronger against
breakage. There is no scientific data produced to justify the claim of arrest of hair fall or even make
the hair thicker. In any event, despite the disclaimer stating “Visual representation is illustrative
only and may not be an exact representation” the Advertisement is clearly misleading and even
dangerous, if someone were to attempt lifting such heavy dumbbells, the person will suffer severe
spinal injuries.
Under these circumstances, the Order of the CCC is upheld for the claim “arrests hair fall”.
In view of the above, the review application is dismissed with an observation that the advertiser
offered to make necessary amendments with respect to the benefit being due to reduction of hair
breakage.
COMPANY: HINDUSTAN UNILEVER LTD
PRODUCT: Indulekha Bringha Oil
NATURE OF COMPLAINT
Fast Track Complaint received against the TV Commercial and YouTube advertisement of
“Hindustan Unilever Ltd – Indulekha Bringha Oil”, from Marico Limited.
The advertiser is projecting their product as an effective medicine for hereditary hair fall.
Advertisement also claims
“growth of new hair” due to Product application.
The advertisement starts by showing a young man referring to his father & grandfather and saying
that along with the family business, they have passed down upon him the problem of hereditary
hair fall. This clearly refers to the Male Pattern Baldness (MPB). The father shown to be at an
advanced stage of MPB says that he too suffered from hair fall since a young age. The
advertisement further claims that application of Indulekha oil leads to new hair growth, implying
that MPB will be reversed. It ends by the father saying that wish he had indulekha when he was
young, again implying that he would not be in the advanced stage of MPB with the application of
Indulekha oil.
Advertisement clearly misleads consumer to believe that Indulekha is a medicine which will
reverse hereditary hair fall. HUL, having proved twice before ASCI expert panel that their product
is only an adjuvant therapy, should withdraw all such advertisements which claims new growth
due to Indulekha Hair Oil. The present advertisement being so misleading that it even claims
treatment of hereditary hair fall problem.
Advertiser is making false claim of hereditary hair fall cure, we request ASCI expert panel to
examine veracity of this claim.
It is submitted that hereditary hair fall problem, (false) product benefit & wish by father had been
cleverly portrayed to give an overall impression that Indulekha is the medicine which is effective
for new hair growth and reversal of baldness. This clever portrayal is based on falsehood and half-
truth it will certainly misled consumer.”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5isK4FwmgoM
FTCP RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The FTCP reviewed the TVC, and Digital advertisement (YouTube) and claims made therein and
noted the Advertiser’s written response.
The FTCP noted that the advertisement refers to hereditary male pattern baldness and indicates that
the product is effective in such cases. Advertisement also claims “grows new hair” due to Product
application in such scenario.
The advertiser submitted a clinical study report, affidavit by the actor as an individual testimonial
and reference to few in vitro / animal studies regarding efficacy of the active ingredient. However,
the FTCP noted that while the story in the TVC focuses on hereditary male pattern hairloss being
reversed, the clinical study inclusion criteria did not include such study subjects. Moreover, the
study results indicated that the non-treatment group and control group (coconut oil only) also
showed a significant improvement over time in terms of hair density. Therefore, this study was not
considered acceptable in the context of the current TVC. In the absence of robust clinical data in
statistically significant representative sample size to prove efficacy of the product in reversing male
pattern baldness, the individual testimonial was not considered to be acceptable. The advertiser did
not submit any references from classical Ayurvedic literature to support that the active ingredient/s
help in hair regrowth in case of male pattern baldness.
In view of the above, the FTCP concluded that in the context of the TVC positioned on solution
for male pattern baldness, the claim “grows new hair” was not substantiated. The advertisement is
misleading by ambiguity and implication. The advertisement contravened Chapter I.1 and I.4 of
the ASCI code. This complaint was UPHELD.
COMPANY: KRAFT HEINZ INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED
PRODUCT: Complan
NATURE OF COMPLAINT
Fast Track Complaint received against the Print advertisement of “Kraft Heinz India Private Limited
- Complan” which appeared in The Telegraph, Kolkata dated 15th July 2018, from GlaxoSmithKline
Consumer Healthcare Ltd.
The print Advertisement of the Advertiser makes a claim of "Best ever Complan has Protein
equivalent to 1 full egg". The visuals show a yellow cup with Complan written on it on the top of
the podium with a full egg in front. There is a claim "1st class Protein" written below it. There is a
blue cup much smaller in size than the Complan cup at a lower height on the podium with half an
egg in front.
The Advertiser uses the following disclaimer for its claims:
"One recommended serve of Complan has highest Protein compared to the Protein content in one
recommended serve of other health drinks price below Rs. 600 rupees per kg for children between
6-15 years of age (data as of 52 weeks prior to May 2018)"
"Protein that contains all essential amino acids are known as 1st class Protein (Biology: A functional
approach pg.75)"
Complaint I - The Blue cup shown in the Print Advertisement denotes Horlicks It is submitted that
the blue cup is popularly associated with Horlicks.
a) Horlicks uses a blue cup in all its advertisements and promotional materials where it promotes
hot consumption of the product i.e. in the East and South markets which are also its biggest markets.
The Advertisements under complaint being in Bengali language are also directed at the East market.
The consistent use of this visual over many years in conjunction with the brand has made the
blue cup identifiable with Horlicks (amongst health food drinks) in the minds of the consumer.
Attached as Annexure 2 are snapshots of advertisements of Horlicks showing the use of the blue
cup in TVCs and print advertisements over a period of many years, snapshot of the website and the
product pack.
The Advertiser makes the following disclaimer: "One recommended serve of Complan has highest
Protein compared to the Protein content in one recommended serve of other health drinks price
below Rs. 600 rupees per kg for children between 6-15 years of age (data as of 52 weeks prior to
May 2018)"
Without prejudice to the fact that the disclaimer is entirely misleading by ambiguity, it makes the
Advertiser's intent abundantly clear that the product being compared is Horlicks.
Attached as Annexure 4 are snap shots of previous advertisements of the Advertiser where they
have used the blue cup to denote Horlicks.
Even otherwise, the intention to target Horlicks is clear as it is the market leader in the category and
out of the two other leading brands Bournvita uses an orange cup and Boost uses a red cup.
Complaint II - The Advertisement unfairly and maliciously denigrates Horlicks
The entire visual gives to the viewers an impression that Horlicks is lesser than or inferior to
Complan in all respects whereas what is being compared is only the protein content. It gives to
the Consumers an impression that only Complan contains 1st Class Protein whereas even
Horlicks delivers all essential amino acids and on that basis also contains 1st class Protein.
Attached herewith as Annexure 6 are lab analysis reports showing the presence of all essential
amino acids in Horlicks. However, the Advertiser's claim of 1st class Protein in conjunction with
a comparative claim on Protein content leads the consumer into believing that only Complan has
1st class Protein and is thus a superior product.
The overall effect of the advertisement as seen through the entire visual is thus to disparage or
denigrate the Complainant's product through a misleading claim.
By just highlighting the protein content in comparison with and denigration of Horlicks or
even other health drinks, the Advertiser has sought to confer an artificial advantage upon its
product. For a clearer understanding a comparison was done on the nutrient delivery of Horlicks
and Complan attached as Annexure 7. The comparison makes it evident that Horlicks weighs
higher on parameters such as vitamins and minerals delivery. Majority of micronutrients are
higher in Horlicks whereas Complan is higher on "negative ingredients" like sugar and fat.
Micronutrient deficiencies are highly rampant in India. Latest NFHS IV data reports a high
percentage of anemic children in India (>50%)i. Deficiencies of other micronutrients like some
B-complex vitamins particularly riboflavin, folic acid and perhaps vitamin B12 are also
commonii. In wake of new data supported by NFHS IV, it is very clear that equal focus should
be laid on the supplementation of micronutrients. Coming to the critical role of micronutrients
in growth and development, European Food Safety Association (EFSA) recognizes the role of
almost all micronutrients in growthiii. And as shown in Annexure 7, Horlicks delivers better on
the micronutrient profile.
Complaint III -The Advertisements is misleading
The disclaimer of 'other health drinks priced below 600 rupees/kg' is an artificial and specious
distinction incorporated by the advertiser to technically comply with the ASCI Guidelines in this
regard while actually being in flagrant violation of the principles on which it is based. Basing a
claim of superiority in health drinks, the category which the advertiser admittedly belongs to,
while at the same time, excluding all products priced higher than itself exploits consumers lack
of awareness of the various options available in the market. Seeking refuge under a selective
disclaimer abuses the trust of consumers who would be misled into believing that all other health
drinks have merely half the protein compared to Complan.”
FTCP RECOMMENDATION: UPHELD
The Complainant as well as the Advertiser representatives were given the opportunity for
personal hearing with the Technical expert and the ASCI Secretary General. Data submitted by
the complainant and the advertiser was reviewed by the technical expert.
The FTCP reviewed the print advertisement and noted the Advertiser’s written response. The
details of the complaint and the rationale for claim support was taken into consideration.
The FTCP concluded as follows –
Complaint I - The Blue cup shown in the Print Advertisement denotes Horlicks
Complaint II - The Advertisement unfairly and maliciously denigrates Horlicks
The FTCP referred to a complaint taken up earlier (Ref. FTCC 1806-FTCC.7) wherein complaint
of similar nature was not upheld as the FTCP noted that the blue cup shown in the TVC is not
uniquely identifiable with Horlicks as neither is it the “product” nor is it branded. Moreover, the
advertiser submitted evidence wherein cups, glasses, sippers etc in different colours have been
used in the past Horlicks communications. The FTCP did not consider this depiction incorrect
or objectionable.
The FTCP also noted that the blue cup shown on product packaging (new element raised in the
current complaint) is also branded. As the depiction of the cup in the print advertisement is not
branded, the FTCP did not agree with the advertiser’s contention that the blue cup shown in the
print advertisement denotes Horlicks.
The advertiser submitted evidence of one serve of their product containing protein equivalent of
average medium size egg. The FTCP also noted that the advertiser has qualified the claim by
way of a disclaimer -
"^ (in comparison) as per the recommended serve of products that are less than 600 rupees/kgs
(52 weeks till May 2018) and tested among 6-15-year-old children"
The claim not only covered top five players in the market but also more than 90% of the
volume share of the market (ACN retail panel data; Volume market share for 52wk period
ending June 2018). The FTCP did not consider taking protein content as the basis of
comparison and qualifying the claim appropriately to be objectionable.
The advertisement was not considered to be denigrating Horlicks.
In view of the above, the above referred complaints were NOT UPHELD.
However, the FTCP observed that the advertiser indicates that their product has 1st Class protein.
But the depiction in the print advertisement of placement of the text below yellow cup only
creates an impression that other product being compared against does not have any 1st Class
protein. This aspect (absence of 1st class protein in other products) was substantiated whereas
the complainant submitted data showing presence of all essential amino acids in Horlicks. The
FTCP considered this to be misleading by omission and implication. The advertisement unfairly
denigrates other health drinks. The print advertisement was in contravention of Chapters 1.1, I.4
and IV.1 c,d,e of the ASCI Code. This complaint was UPHELD.
COMPANY: KRAFT HEINZ INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED
PRODUCT: Complan
NATURE OF COMPLAINT
Fast Track Complaint received against the TV Commercials which appeared on Zee Bangla and Zee
24 Ghante dated
13th July 2018 of “Kraft Heinz India Private Limited - Complan”, from GlaxoSmithKline Consumer
Healthcare Ltd. The TVC attached as Annexure 1 is in Bengali language and has Mr. Saurav
Ganguly (Dada) visiting a household with a young child who is eager to get his autograph on his
cricket bat but is not able to pull out the bat from the height at which it has been hung on the wall.
The health drink being referred to is shown in a blue cup on the table to which Mr. Ganguly points
a finger and says in a sneering tone "This? This will only make half-dada". The celebrity goes on to
say, "You must be thinking that you are giving protein equal to one whole egg, but, actually, you
are giving only this much.
The TVC further makes the claim that "A cup of Complan provides protein equivalent to 1 whole
egg. Which means Complete/ Full Dada".
The TVC attached as Annexure 2 is also in Bengali language and shows a child character playing
cricket who fails to take a catch. The character looks disappointed on the "failure". The mother reacts
to the dismay of the kid and is seen handing her a blue cup suggesting that with consumption of a
health drink she'll also be able to take catches like the legendary cricketer Saurav Ganguly (called
Dada in the TVC). Further it is seen that the celebrity endorser Mr. Saurav Ganguly enters the shot,
takes the blue cup from the hands of the child and says, "This? This will only make halfdada".
The TVC further makes the claim that "A cup of Complan provides protein equivalent to 1 whole
egg. Which means Complete/ Full Dada".
Complaint I - The Blue cup shown in the TVCs denotes Horlicks It is submitted that the blue cup is
popularly associated with Horlicks.
a) Horlicks uses a blue cup in all its advertisements and promotional materials where it promotes
hot consumption of the product i.e. in the East and South markets which are also its biggest markets.
The Advertisements under complaint being in Bengali language are also directed at the East market.
The consistent use of this visual over many years in conjunction with the brand in the said
markets has made the blue cup identifiable with Horlicks (amongst health food drinks) in the minds
of the consumer.
Attached as Annexure 3 are snapshots of advertisements of Horlicks showing the use of the blue
cup in TVCs and print advertisements over a period of many years, snapshot of the website and the
product pack.
The Advertiser uses the following disclaimer for the comparison:
"^ (in comparison) as per the recommended serve of products that are less than 600 rupees/kgs (52
weeks till May 2018) and tested among 6-15-year-old children"
Without prejudice to the fact that the disclaimer is entirely misleading by ambiguity, it makes the
Advertiser's intent abundantly clear that the product being compared is Horlicks.
Attached as Annexure 5 are snap shots of previous advertisements of the Advertiser where they have
used the blue cup to denote Horlicks.
Even otherwise, the intention to target Horlicks is clear as it is the market leader in the category and
out of the two other leading brands Bournvita uses an orange cup and Boost uses a red cup.
Complaint II - The TVCs are unfairly and maliciously denigrating Horlicks
The TVCs are highly denigrating to our product Horlicks through the storyline of the Advertisements
and the language and tonality.
The celebrity is shown taking away the blue cup from the child (Annexure 2) and pointing a finger
at the blue cup (Annexure 1) and stating in a sneering tone "This? This will only make half-dada"
We would like to submit that the TVCs are misleading by exaggeration and implication. "Aadha
dada" and "Puro Dada" in the context of the storyline is representative of one's potential. The TVCs
mislead the consumer into believing that the consumption of another health drink (read Horlicks)
would lead to achievement of only half potential but consumption of Complan will result in
achievement of one's full potential.
The storyline of the Advertisements give the impression that Horlicks is in some manner inferior to
Complan. The claim of the health drink in the blue cup making only "Aadha dada", the visual of the
egg being cut into half and the look of shock on the mother's face together gives the viewers an
impression that by consumption of Horlicks the child is only getting half of what he/she ought to be
getting for their growth and development and to enable them to realize their full potential.
Complaint III - The Advertisements are misleading: The advertiser misleads the consumer by stating
that:
a) One cup of Complan has protein equivalent to one egg
b) Other Health drinks provide protein equivalent to a half egg only
The Advertiser claims in the qualifiers:
• One Serving of Complan (33 gm) approx. 5.94 gms of protein^
• One average mid-sized+ egg (44 gm) approx. 5.84 gm protein*
^ (in comparison) as per the recommended serve of products that are less than 600 rupees/kgs (52
weeks till May 2018) and tested among 6-15 year old children
* Source for the calculation done on the amount of protein present in an average mid-sized egg -
Indian Food Composition Tables; NIN 2017
+ As per USDA average mid-sized egg
a) The disclaimer of 'less than 600 rupees/kg' is an artificial and specious distinction incorporated
by the advertiser to technically comply with the ASCI Guidelines in this regard while actually being
in flagrant violation of the principles on which it is based. The claim of 'Other Health drinks provide
protein equivalent to a half egg only' is clearly misleading as there are a number of other health
drinks that provide as much or greater protein delivery in a single serving. Basing a claim of
superiority in health drinks, the category which the advertiser admittedly belongs to, while at the
same time, excluding all products priced higher than itself exploits consumers lack of awareness of
the various options available in the market.
The Advertiser's claim "One cup of Complan gives protein equivalent to 1 whole egg ...which means
Puro Dada" is highly misleading by exaggeration and implication. There is no one way in which
any product or even a single nutrient can singly assure achievement of full potential much less by
consumption of Complan only because Complan provides protein equivalent to 1 whole egg.
By just highlighting the protein content in comparison with and denigration of Horlicks or even
other health drinks, the Advertiser has sought to confer an artificial advantage upon its product. For
a clearer understanding a comparison was done on the nutrient delivery of Horlicks and Complan
attached as Annexure 6. The comparison makes it evident that Horlicks weighs higher on parameters
such as vitamins and minerals delivery. Majority of micronutrients are higher in Horlicks whereas
Complan is higher on "negative ingredients" like sugar and fat.
Coming to the critical role of micronutrients in growth and development, European Food Safety
Association (EFSA) recognizes the role of almost all micronutrients in growthiv. And as shown in
Annexure 6, Horlicks delivers better on the micronutrient profile. However, the Advertisements
unfairly denigrate Horlicks just based on one parameter and deliberately ignoring other vital and
essential nutrients in products which play an equally important role in growth and development of
children.”
FTCP RECOMMENDATION: NOT UPHELD
The Complainant as well as the Advertiser representatives were given the opportunity for personal
hearing with the Technical expert and the ASCI Secretary General. Data submitted by the
complainant and the advertiser was reviewed by the technical expert.
The FTCP reviewed the TVC and noted the Advertiser’s written response. The details of the
complaint and the rationale for claim support was taken into consideration.
The FTCP concluded as follows –
Complaint I - The Blue cup shown in the TVCs denotes Horlicks
Complaint II - The TVCs are unfairly and maliciously denigrating Horlicks Complaint III - The
Advertisements are misleading
The FTCP referred to a complaint taken up earlier (Ref. FTCC 1806-FTCC.7) wherein complaint of
similar nature was not upheld as the FTCP noted that the blue cup shown in the TVC is not uniquely
identifiable with Horlicks as neither is it the “product” nor is it branded. Moreover, the advertiser
submitted evidence wherein cups, glasses, sippers etc in different colours have been used in the past
Horlicks communications. The FTCP did not consider this depiction incorrect or objectionable.
The FTCP also noted that the blue cup shown on product packaging (new element raised in the
current complaint) is also branded. As the depiction of the cup in the advertisement is not branded,
the FTCP did not agree with the advertiser’s contention that the blue cup shown in the TVCs denotes
Horlicks.
The advertiser submitted evidence of one serve of their product containing protein equivalent of
average medium size egg. The FTCP also noted that the advertiser has qualified the claim by way
of a disclaimer -
"^ (in comparison) as per the recommended serve of products that are less than 600 rupees/kgs (52
weeks till May 2018) and tested among 6-15-year-old children"
The claim not only covered top five players in the market but also more than 90% of the volume
share of the market (ACN retail panel data; Volume market share for 52wk period ending June
2018). The FTCP did not consider taking protein content as the basis of comparison and
qualifying the claim appropriately to be objectionable.
The FTCP observed that the TVC shows Sourav Ganguly (popularly known as “Dada”). The FTCP
considered the reference to Aadha dada and puro dada as creative licence. In view of the above,
these complaints were NOT UPHELD.