CCC Recommendations - August 2018 - The Advertising ...

CCC Recommendations - August 2018

1807-C.665

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.

1807-C.993

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.






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.

1807-C.808

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”


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



1807-C.890

COMPANY: Denajee Health Care Products

Claim Objected To:

“No.1 Satreetha Shampoo”




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.

1807-C.900

COMPANY: Goodlife Wellness Centre

Claims Objected To:

1. Reduce 20 Kg weight till 20 July'18.

2. Get assured result.


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.

1807-C.901

COMPANY: Abbott India Ltd

PRODUCT: Abbott Brufen Active

Claim Objected To:

“Worldwide Trusted”


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.


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


1807-C.903

COMPANY: Henna Industries Pvt Ltd

PRODUCT: Color Mate Hair color

Claim Objected To:

“Hibiscus strengthens your hair and prevents hair loss”




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.

1807-C.906

COMPANY: Diamond Water Park Pvt Ltd

PRODUCT: Diamond Park

Claim Objected To:

“Pune's No.1 Water and Adventure Park”


The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in the complaint. 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.

1807-C.907

COMPANY: Diamond Water Park Pvt Ltd

PRODUCT: Diamond Park

Claim Objected To:

“Voted Pune's No.1 Park”







“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.

1807-C.910

COMPANY: Dr. Richa’s Unique Clinic

Claims Objected To:

“International Certified No.1 Clinic”

“Height Treatment - increase height 2-7 cm within 2 months”







“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.

1807-C.911

COMPANY: Dr. Richa’s Unique Clinic

Claim Objected To:

“India's best doctors”







“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.

1807-C.912

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”








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


was UPHELD.

1807-C.913

COMPANY: Godrej & Boyce Mfg. Co. Ltd

PRODUCT: Godrej Air Conditioner

Claim Objected To:

“India's Most Heavy-Duty AC Range”




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


Chapters I.1, I.4 and I.5 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

1807-C.915

COMPANY: Fashion Dot Tailoring Technologies

PRODUCT: Hitech Fashions

Claim Objected To:

“India's No.1 Laser Tailoring Company”







“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.

1807-C.917

COMPANY: Lotus Herbals Ltd

PRODUCT: Lotus Safe Sun Block SPF 40

Claim Objected To:

“SPF 40”





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.

1807-C.918

COMPANY: Manipal Hospital

Claims Objected To:

“India's most trusted healthcare network”

“India's most trusted hospital network”


The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objections raised in the complaint. The


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


was UPHELD.

1807-C.919

COMPANY: Medispa Laser & Cosmetic Surgery Center

Claim Objected To:

“Reliable and trusted by more than 100 doctors for their own hair transplant.”




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


1807-C.925

COMPANY: LG Electronics India Pvt. Ltd

PRODUCT: LG Durables

Claim Objected To:

“India's No.1”

CCC RECOMMENDATION: NOT UPHELD



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.

1807-C.928

COMPANY: Kose Corporation India Pvt Ltd

PRODUCT: Spawake Moisture Fresh BB Cream

Claim Objected To:

“SPF 25/PA++”




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.

1806-C.929

COMPANY: Pan India Paryatan Ltd

PRODUCT: Water Kingdom

Claim Objected To:

“Asia's largest theme water park”







“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.

1807-C.930

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


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


1806-C.966

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.





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.

1806-C.969

COMPANY: Cellcom Mobile Training Institute

Claim Objected To:

“Odisha and Bhubaneshwar’s No. 1 mobile training institute”

(Source of claim not mentioned.)






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.

1806-C.973

COMPANY: Major Kalshi Classes

Claim Objected To:

“India’s No. 1 Defense Training Institute”






and in the absence of any comments or response from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “India’s No.

1 Defense 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 defense 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

Programs as well as Chapters I.1, I.2, I.4 and I.5 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

1807-C.990

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






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.

1807-C.888

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







“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.

1807-C.889

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.





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.

1807-C.891

COMPANY: Herbal Health Care

Claims Objected To:

1. Permanent cure for Psoriasis

2. Permanent Solutions provided for diabetes and joint pain.







“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


Chapters I.1, I.4, I.5 and III.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

1807-C.894

COMPANY: Livo Universal

PRODUCT: Immuno 1

Claim Objected To:

“You will never get ill”







“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.

1807-C.895

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







“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.

1807-C.896

COMPANY: Dr Mukherjee Fertility Centre

Claim Objected To:

“Successful treatment of infertility through panchkarma and herbal medicine”







“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.

1807-C.897

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







“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.

1807-C.963

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.





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.

1806-C.974


Claim Objected To:

“The Homeopathy tablets removes/ get rid of diseases forever”

Objection-

Visuals imply increase in stature of the child.






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.

1807-C.1071


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





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.

1805-C.579

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.”


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.

1807-C.943

COMPANY: Dr. Gaur Hari Singhania Institute of Management & Research

Claim Objected To: “100% Placement support”






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


1807-C.944

COMPANY: Asian Business School

Claim Objected To:

“Highest package offered 15 lac/p.a.”




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.

1807-C.945

COMPANY: Brij Education Trust-BIMT Gurgaon

Claim Objected To:

“100% Placement Assurance”





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.

1807-C.946

COMPANY: Deen Dayal Upadhya Institute of Management & Higher Studies

Claim Objected To:

“First Placement Lab in India for 100% Placement”







“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.

1807-C.947

COMPANY: Bharitya Vidya Bhavan’s Centre for Communication & Management (BCCM)

Claim Objected To:

“100% placement”







“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.

1807-C.948

COMPANY: Shri Ram Murti Smarak College of Engineering & Technology

Claim Objected To:

“100% placement for eligible candidates every year in companies of global repute”







“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


1807-C.949

COMPANY: Accurate Group of Institutions

PRODUCT: Accurate Inst. of Mgt & Technology

Claim Objected To:

“100% Placement track record”







“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


The print advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as


1807-C.951

COMPANY: INDUS University

PRODUCT: Indus Institute of Management Studies

Claim Objected To:

“Track Record Of 100% Quality Placements”







“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.


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.

1807-C.952

COMPANY: Jamia Hamdard

Claim Objected To: “100% Placement Assistance”







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


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.

1807-C.953

COMPANY: Accurate Group of Institutions

PRODUCT: Accurate Institute of Advanced Management

Claim Objected To:

100% Placement Assistance












1807-C.954

COMPANY: Science & Technology Entrepreneurs Park-HBTI, Kanpur

Claim Objected To: “100% Placement Support”







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


1807-C.955

COMPANY: Moti Lal Nehru School of Management





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.

1807-C.956

COMPANY: R.L. Institute of Management Studies

Claim Objected To:

“Ensures 100% Placement Assistance”.




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


Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.4 and I.5 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

1807-C.1033

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 especially 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.






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.

1806-C.720

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


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




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


1807-C.785

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.



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


The CCC did not consider the advertisement to be denigrating to competition. This complaint was NOT UPHELD.

1807-C.819

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,â€˜Advertisements for food or

beverages unless nutritionally designed as such should not be promoted or portrayed as a meal replacementâ€™.

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




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.

1807-C.975

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




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. 1808-C.1173 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

1807-C.996

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+.





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.

1807-C.1018

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.





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.

1807-C.1075

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..




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.

1807-C.1081

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”



forwarded the details of the complaint, verbatim, to the advertiser with a request to respond to the same. The


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.

1807-C.1084

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/post-graduation/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/post-graduation/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.”





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



1807-C.1097

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”





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


observed that the specified BARC source is – BARC/ All India 1MN+ /NCCS AB Males 22-50

/Wk 24-29’18, 24 hours/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.

1806-C.759

COMPANY: Ayaan Foundation Ayaan Defence Academy

Claim Objected To:

“100% Job otherwise fee return.”






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


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


1807-C.914

COMPANY: Hair Dream Center

Claims Objected To:

1. Get rid of baldness

2. Money back guarantee.







“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.

1807-C.916

COMPANY: N. Ranga Rao & Sons

PRODUCT: Lia Agarbathi

Claim Objected To:

“India's No.1 Agarbathi Brand”




replied requesting for an extension to submit their response. The advertiser was granted an extension of five days to

the standard lead time of seven days to submit their reply in response to their request for this extension. Advertiser in

their response stated that the claim made is basis an independent research/assessment conducted by Nielsen for top

three brands of agarbathis. The result 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.

The claim support data provided by the advertiser was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC viewed

the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response as well as the opinion of the Technical expert

presented at the meeting. The CCC observed that the Nielsen data showed that Cycle brand of agarbathis 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. As per the CCC, this data proved that ̀ Cycle’ which is the mother brand was in leadership position

(No.1). However, this data for `Cycle’ brand does not hold true for `Lia’ agarbathis, as Lia is a different brand.

Based on these observations, the CCC concluded that Lia agarbathis claiming to be “India's No.1 Agarbathi Brand”,

was false, and misleading by ambiguity 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.


1807-C.922

COMPANY: Sri Venkateswara Filling Station

PRODUCT: Essar Oil

Claim Objected To: “World No.1 Oil Company”


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.

1807-C.926

COMPANY: Sahu Air Cooler

Claim Objected To:

“World No.1”







“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.

1807-C.927

COMPANY: Skin Technology Clinic

Claim Objected To:

“Successful treatment of baldness”







“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.

1807-C.967

COMPANY: Shoolini University

Claim Objected To:

“100% placements from last 3 years.”






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.

1807-C.970

COMPANY: Farouk Educational Trust

PRODUCT: Raak Arts and Science College

Claim Objected To:

“100% placement”






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


1807-C.978

COMPANY: St. Soldier Institute of International Studies

Claim Objected To:

“The safest and right way to go for Canadian Education”





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


1807-C.980

COMPANY: Jai Hind Group of Institution

Claims Objected To:

1. 100% results since 2006.

2. 100% placements.





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.

1807-C.984

COMPANY: Times Internet Limited (Gaana.com)

Claim Objected To:

“India’s favorite music app.”

(Source of claim not mentioned.)


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


1807-C.985

COMPANY: Vedanta Academy IAS

Claim Objected To:

“India s No. 1 Institute for UPSC Exams.”






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


1807-C. 986

COMPANY: N Rangarao and Sons

PRODUCT: Vasu 100

Claim Objected To:

“Not only country’s but World’s No. 1”




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.

1807-C.1038

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.




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.

1807-C.1040

COMPANY: Kolors Health Care India Pvt. Ltd

PRODUCT: Kolors Slimming & Beauty

Claim Objected To:

“Reduce belly, sides, and 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.








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



1807-C.1069

COMPANY: Marwadi Education Foundation - Marwadi University

Claim Objected To:

“University”





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.

https://www.ugc.ac.in/oldpdf/Consolidated%20list%20of%20All%20Universities.pdf

https://www.ugc.ac.in/oldpdf/Consolidated%20list%20of%20All%20Universities.pdf

1807-C.1070

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







“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.

1806-C.706

COMPANY: Sarkar Dispensary

Claims Objected To:

1. Best Ayurvedic Clinic.

2. Internationally Awarded.







“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.

1807-C.1039

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.





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.

1807-C.999

COMPANY: Poddar Management Technical Campus

Claim Objected To:

“100% Placement Assistance.”




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 organize 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 organized 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.

1807-C.1000

COMPANY: Institute of Advanced Mgt & Research (IAMR)













1807-C.1001

COMPANY: Indirapuram Institute of Higher Studies

Claim Objected To:

“100% Assured & Guaranteed Placement Assistance”








“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.

1807-C.1002

COMPANY: Indus School of Business Mgt. (Gurgaon)

Claim Objected To: “100% Placement Assurance”





prescribed due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and upon careful consideration of the


“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



1807-C.1003

COMPANY: Chathamkulam Foundation Charitable Trust

PRODUCT: Chathamkulam Inst of Research & Advanced Studies













1807-C.1004

COMPANY: T. M. Bhagalpur University













1807-C.1005

COMPANY: Mar Athanasios College for Advanced Studies (MACFAST)

Claim Objected To:

“100% Placement Cell Assistance”







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



1807-C.1006

COMPANY: International School of Management (ISM Patna)

Claim objected to:

“100% Placement Assistance”












1807-C.1007

COMPANY: Netaji Subhas Institute of Business Management

Claim Objected To:

“100% Placement Assistance.”




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


well as Chapters I.4 and I.5 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

1807-C.1008

COMPANY: Christ Institute of Management (CIM)

Claim Objected To:

“100% Placement Assistance”












1807-C.1011

COMPANY: KV Charitable Trust

PRODUCT: KVIM Business School

Claim Objected To:

“100% Placement Record (Since Inception)”




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.



well as Chapters I.1, I.4 and I.5 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.

1807-C.1013

COMPANY: EMPI Business School

Claim Objected To:

“Get Work Permit to Work in Canada after Course Completion”

(The above claim implies 100% Placement)





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


UPHELD.

1807-C.1015

COMPANY: Harlal Institute of Management &Technology

Claim Objected To:

“100% Placements since last 20 years”







“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



1807-C.1016

COMPANY: Indian Institute of Finance

Claim Objected To:

“100% Placement track record”




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.


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


1808-C.1025

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.






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.

1807-C.1053

COMPANY: Institute of Management Studies

Claim Objected To:

“100% Placement”




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.

1807-C.1054

COMPANY: Institute of Management Studies

Claims Objected To:

1. Consistent 100% Placements Since Inception

2. 100% Placements




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



1807-C.1072

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.



ingredients provided? Can the advertiser establish the relationship between the claims and the lemon and

aloe vera in the soap?


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.




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.

1807-C.1073

COMPANY: Pan Parag India Ltd

PRODUCT: Pan Parag Pan Masala

Claim Objected To:

“World’s most popular pan masala.” (Disclaimer’s not in Hindi.)




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


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.


1807-C.1074

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.




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.

1807-C.1082

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.”





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.


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. 1808-C.1181

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

1804-C.231

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.

1807-C.960

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.”






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


https://www.shopkio.com/product-detail/attractiveblue-%20colored-printed-khadi-silk-saree-onlineshopkio/%20899















1807-C.860

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.


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


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


UPHELD.

1807-C.1041

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.




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.


1807-C.1086

COMPANY: Skyline Builders

PRODUCT: Skyline Cambridge

Claim Objected To:

“Kerala’s No 1 Builder”




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,


1806-C.619

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


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


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.

1807-C.892

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.







“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.

1807-C.1048

COMPANY: IMM-FOSTIIMA Business School

Claim Objected To:

“100% Campus Placements”




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


and is likely to lead to grave or widespread disappointment in the minds of consumers. The advertisement contravened



1808-C.1120

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.




was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat which they availed and subsequently


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.

1807-C.1128

COMPANY: Marico Ltd

PRODUCT: Livon Hair Gain

Claim Objected to:

“Increase your hair density in 45 days”

Complaint:

Description:

The ad begins with a text appearing on the screen which says- scalp visible? Don't get late. Increase your hair density

in 45 days. The product pack of Livon Hair Gain is shown.

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. Hair fall occurs due to many reasons like certain diseases, genetics, medicines etc. Does the product help in

increasing hair density in spite of any of the reasons for the loss of hair? 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.





subsequently submitted their written response. The advertiser had stated in their response that the claim made is

based on a clinical study conducted on subjects suffering from hair loss, to assess the efficacy of the product. The

subjects were recruited and placed with either the placebo or test product for a period of 180 days. Interim results of

the 45 days pointed out that for hair density, the placebo group showed an average reduction of 9.4% vs day 0, while

the test group showed an average increase of 9.93%. Between the groups, the test group showed a 19.33% increase

in hair density compared to the placebo group. This outcome was highly statistically significant at 99% confidence

interval. Advertiser has also included direction for use and other appropriate information on product pack (like *

not for hair fall due to medical reason etc.) for consumer to make informed choice. Advertiser provided a copy of

the said clinical study report, and copy of the product packaging. 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.

The CCC observed that the advertiser did not submit the detailed report from the agency conducting the study. The

effectiveness of the various ingredients responsible for hair growth were not adequately substantiated. The study

results mentioned did not indicate that the study took into account various reasons for hair loss while recruiting the

subjects and therefore has not conclusively proven specific benefit of the product. Based on this assessment, the CCC

concluded that the claim, “45* dino mein hair density badhaye” (“Increase your hair density in 45 days”) was

inadequately substantiated and is misleading by exaggeration. The claim 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


1808-C.1129

COMPANY: TV9 (TV9 Gujarati)

Claim:

“TV9 Gujarati No. 1

Objection:


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.”






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.

1808-C.1130

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.





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.

1808-C.1136

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


ASCI observed that the advertisement makes a claim of “100% Placement Assistance” which is likely to be misleading

by implication.






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


1807-C.987

COMPANY: Romana Distillery Industrial Pvt

PRODUCT: Romana Water

Claim Objected To:

“Water with highest natural minerals available in Kerala.”




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



1807-C.988

COMPANY: Ahzaab Foods Pvt Ltd

PRODUCT: Healthy Wings

Claims Objected To:

“More protein” “Less fat”




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.

1807-C.1127

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.”




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



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. 1808-C.1299

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

1807-C.876

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.

1806-C.700

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 totally a misleading advertise. 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


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.

1807-C.964

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.





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.

1808-C.1096

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


The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant and




prescribed due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the Ad – Hoarding, and upon careful consideration of the


"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.

1808-C.1175

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 especially when it's stuck on the showroom main door.


The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant and




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

1808-C.1177

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.





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



1808C.1190

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 health 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.






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.

1808C.1194

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.”





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.

1808-C.1238

COMPANY: Paytm E-Commerce Pvt Ltd

PRODUCT: Paytm

Complaint:





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


1805-C.357

COMPANY: K G Dholakiya

Claim Objected To: “Gujarat's No.1 School”







“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.

1808-C.1104

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.




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


1807-C.1105

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.






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


1807-C.1108

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.




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.

1807-C.1109

COMPANY: CBS Group of Institutes

Claim Objected To:

“Best Institute of Haryana”






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


UPHELD.

1808-C.893

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.







“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.

1808-C.1117

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






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


1808-C.1118


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


3. Reference claims 2 and 3; is the effect same for everyone irrespective of genetic conditions, lifestyle and

gender. Please substantiate.

4. Reference 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












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.


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.

1808-C.1134

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.



Link of Ad: http://www.pankajakasthuri.in/otc/pankajakasthuri-breathe-eazy





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.


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.

http://www.pankajakasthuri.in/otc/pankajakasthuri-breathe-eazy






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

1808-C.1160


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


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












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 color 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.

1808-C.1169

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?


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.








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


“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


1808-C.1176

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

Ayurveda as well as patent by Government of India. This advs. 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 variety 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.





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.

1808-C.1119


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.




was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat which they availed, and subsequently


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 hour 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 hour 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.

1808-C.1158

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






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


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

1808-C.1161

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


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.”






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


1808-C.1172


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.





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






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.

1807-C.1113

COMPANY: Cadila Healthcare Ltd

PRODUCT: Nutralite Mayo

Claim Objected To:

“Healthier”



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


1808-C.1131

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:


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.





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.

1808-C.1162

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.




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.

1808-C.1191

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.”




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 telecom.

Advertiser stated in their response that the website communication compares butter vs margarine. As claim support

data, the advertiser provided an article from Harvard 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 Tran’s 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, trans fats, 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.

https://www.health.harvard.edu/staying-healthy/butter-vs-margarine










1808-IRP.12

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.

1808-IRP.13

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.”


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”

1808-IRP.14

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.


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.

1808-IRP.11

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.

1807-FTCC.11

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.

1807-FTCC.10

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:



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 -



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.

CCC Recommendations - August 2018 - The Advertising ...

Documents

Transcript of CCC Recommendations - August 2018 - The Advertising ...