asci upheld complaints against 152 out of 209 advertisements

19 Pages·2016·0.49 MB·English

by  Pallavi Arora

ASCI CCC Recommendations: August 2016
ASCI UPHELD COMPLAINTS AGAINST 152 OUT OF 209
ADVERTISEMENTS

Mumbai, November 21st 2016: In August 2016, ASCI’s Consumer Complaints Council (CCC)
upheld complaints against 152 out of 209 advertisements. Out of 152 advertisements against which
complaints were upheld, 27 belonged to the Healthcare category, 66 to the Education category,
followed by 17 in the Food & Beverages category, 10 in Personal Care Category, 5 in clothing and
accessories category and 27 advertisements from other categories.

HEALTH CARE:
The CCC found the following claims of 27 advertisements in health care products or services to be
either misleading or false or not adequately / scientifically substantiated and hence violating ASCI’s
Code. Some of the health care products or services advertisements also contravened provisions of the
Drug & Magic Remedies Act and Chapter 1.1 and III.4 of the ASCI Code. Complaints against the
following advertisements were UPHELD.

1. Rajvaidya Shital Prasad & Sons (Hempushpa): The advertisement’s claim (in Hindi), “No. 1
Medicine and Tonic trusted of crores of women since 90 years”, was not substantiated with
supporting proof, and is misleading by exaggeration. They also claim, “Women Health Issues?
Treat it from the Roots” which was not substantiated with evidence of product efficacy, and
is misleading.

2. Olefia Biopharma Limited (Votif Range of Products): The advertisement’s claims (in Hindi), as
translated into English, “The lack of sexual desire”, “Premature ejaculation & nightfall”,
“Scanty & thin semen”, “Swelling on nerves & lack of strength”, “Low sperm count & their
weakness”, “Incomplete development of organs”, “Inability to complete the act of Fertility”,
“Sagging of organ due to old age”, were not substantiated with evidence of product efficacy,
and are misleading. In addition, specific to the claims implying treatment for all sexual
problems, and the claims, “The lack of sexual desire”, “Premature ejaculation & nightfall”,
“Inability to complete the act of Fertility”, “Decrease in Erection”, read in conjunction with the
advertisement visual implies that the product is meant for enhancement of sexual pleasure
and is in breach of the law as it violated The Drugs & Magic Remedies Act.

3. Chetanta (Get Diabetes cured by acupressure Spring): The advertisement’s claims (in
Gujarati), as translated into English, “Diabetes expert Dr. Chetan Daswani has treated
innumerable patients and they have benefited from it. Dr. Daswani cures the disease of
diabetes without giving any medicine, injection, and tablet. He has done this successful
research”, were not substantiated with data to prove qualifications of Dr. Chetan Daswani as
a diabetes expert, clinical evidence to support treatment without medicine and are grossly
misleading. Also, specific to the claims related to treatment for Diabetes, the advertisement
is in breach of the law as it violated The Drugs & Magic Remedies Act.
4. DHI-Hair Restoration: The advertisement’s claims, “World’s No. 1 Hair Restoration Company”,
“Offers solution to all stages of hair loss”, “200,000 delighted clients”, “120 procedures every
day”, were not substantiated with supporting proof, and are misleading. Further the claim,
“Ranked no. 1 by IMRB”, was not substantiated. The parameter on which it was ranked No.1
was not made available. Also, the date and source for this claim as a reference was not
indicated in the advertisement, and is misleading by ambiguity.

5. Jay Pranav Ayurvedic Pharmaceuticals (Body Plus Capsules): The advertisement’s claims (in
Hindi), as translated into English, “Increase Appetite” and “Gain Weight”, were not
substantiated with proof of efficacy of the product and any clinical evidence and are
misleading.

6. Shri Ram Hospital: The advertisement’s claim (in Hindi), as translated into English, “Successful
Treatment of Piles, Fissure, Fistula”, was not substantiated with clinical evidence, and is
misleading. Also, specific to the claims related to successful treatment for Piles, the
advertisement is in breach of the law as it violated Schedule J of The Drugs and Cosmetic Act,
1940 and Rules, 1945.

7. Chetan Clinic: The advertisement’s claims (in Hindi), as translated into English, “Sex Problems?
Get Successful Treatment with Ayurvedic Medicines”, was not substantiated with clinical data
and is misleading. Also, specific to the claims related to successful treatment for sex problems
and the claims, “Sex Problems? Get Successful Treatment with Ayurvedic Medicines” and
“Now You too can Enjoy Married Life to your Heart’s Content”, read in conjunction with the
advertisement visual implies enhancement of sexual pleasure, which is in breach of the law as
it violated The Drugs & Magic Remedies Act.

8. Anupama Ayurvedic Drug Co. (Arish Tanclear Range): The advertisement’s claim, “India’s
most trusted brand”, was not substantiated with comparative data versus other similar brands
in the same category. The claim is not qualified to mention the source and date of research
and criteria for assessment for the claim made. Also, the claim is misleading by ambiguity and
omission.

9. Nurture Health Care (Ayurex S Capsule): The advertisement’s claims (in Hindi), as translated
into English, “For Men Only”, “Vitality Capsules”, “Difference Guaranteed” and “In the Times
of Happiness for Extra Pleasure”, were not substantiated with product efficacy data and are
misleading. Also, these claims related to the product benefit read in conjunction with the
advertisement visual imply that the product is meant for enhancement of sexual pleasure,
which is in breach of the law as it violated The Drugs & Magic Remedies Act.

10. Divine Care: The advertisement of Divine Care claims, “Permanent End to Pain” and “No pain,
No Surgery, No Diet, No Side Effect”, were not substantiated with clinical evidence, and are
misleading.

11. Zenlabs Ethics (Zenovit Soft Gel): The advertisement’s claims, “No 1 brand in its category”,
was not substantiated with comparative data versus other similar brands in the same category
or any third party validation or research to prove this claim. The claim is not qualified to
mention the source and date of research and criteria for assessment for the claim made. Also,
the claim is misleading by ambiguity and omission.

12. Jippo African Capsule and African Oil: The advertisement’s claims (in Hindi), as translated into
English, “100% Ayurvedic, No Side Effects”, “100% Satisfaction Guaranteed”, “Men can use
capsule and oil for better results” and “Amateurs can also use and see effects”, were not
substantiated with product efficacy data and are misleading. Also, these claims related to the
product benefit read in conjunction with the advertisement visual and the pack visual implies
that the product is meant for enhancement of sexual pleasure, which is in breach of the law
as it violated The Drugs & Magic Remedies Act.

13. Dr. Bhavana Shah Fitness Care Pvt. Ltd. (Fat Freeze): The advertisement’s claims, “World’s
Best Waist Reduction Treatment” and “Latest and Fastest Technology”, were not
substantiated and are misleading by exaggeration.

14. Kerni Fitness Pvt Ltd (Fitness Universe): The advertisement’s claims, “We offer a complete
range of powders, capsules, bars, and drinks. These clinically proven, scientific nutritional
supplements are developed through a six-stage research process that utilizer the expertise of
leading nutritional scientists, doctors and universities”, were not substantiated with technical
data, evidence of the six stage research process as well clinical research and are misleading.

15. Amba Health Clinic: The advertisement’s claims (in Hindi) as translated into English,
“Treatment to gain Weight”, “Stayed Development”, “Increase height or get your money
back”, “Sure-shot Treatment of piles”, “Effective from the beginning, get cured in 60-90 Days”,
“Nightfall, Premature Ejaculation, Sexual weakness in Men”, “Masturbation, Penis Disorders,
Weakness in Nerves”, “You can get rid of loose thin and crooked Penis”, “Itchiness in your
sexual Organs”, “Low Sperm Count”, “Ovarian Cyst”, “Leucorrhoea White Discharge”,
“Sagging of Sexual Organs”, “Lack of Sexual Desire”, “Irregular Periods”, “Make you small
loose underdeveloped chest into a shapely, beautiful and attractive one”, “Enhance your
Feminity” and “Improve Husband Wife Relationship”, were not substantiated with clinical
evidence, and are misleading. In addition, specific to the claims related to increase in height,
and treatment for sexual diseases, the advertisement is in breach of the law as it violated The
Drugs & Magic Remedies Act, 1954. As for the claims related to treatment for Piles, the
advertisement is in breach of the law as it violated Schedule J of The Drugs and Cosmetic Act,
1940 and Rules, 1945.

16. Mohak Bariatrics and Robotics: The advertisement’s claims (in Hindi) as translated into
English, “Indore Becomes the country’s Number 1 City for Freedom from Obesity”, “Created
a New Record in surgery of Obesity” and “Research Consultant Team from TOI announced
Mohak Bariatrics and Robotics to be Country’s Best Centre”, were not substantiated with
supporting evidence, and are misleading by exaggeration.
17. Rex Remedies Pvt Ltd (Rex Dimaghi Brain Tonic): The advertisement’s claim (in Urdu) as
translated into English, “Increases the memory, Gives Success”, was not substantiated with
evidence of product efficacy, and is misleading by exaggeration.

18. German Homeo Laboratories Pvt. Ltd. (German Homeo Laboratory): The advertisement’s
claims (in Bengali) as translated into English, “Don't be upset, without side-effect use homeo
treatment” and “Our Speciality Treatment – Lack of Sex Desire, Arthritis, Piles, Fistula, White
Patches, Psoriasis, Sterile, Women’s Problem, Obesity, Gastric Blood Pressure”, were not
substantiated with clinical evidence, and are misleading. Specific to the claims related to
treatment for sexual problems, with the headline “Unhappy married life/ unsuccessful
married life” and the visual implying enhancement of sexual pleasure, the advertisement is in
breach of the law as it violated The Drugs & Magic Remedies Act, 1954.

19. Women’s Centre: The advertisement’s claims, “Comprehensive Women's Hospital of the Year
(South India)” is based on the award given by Brands Academy. However, there was a
mismatch of the claim and the text in the award certificate which mentions “Best Dedicated
Women’s Hospital in South India”. Hence the claim is was not substantiated and is misleading
by ambiguity and omission. Further for the claim, “Asia Pacific’s Only Fibroid Centre” is based
on the award given by Insightec. However, no details were provided for the background of
the survey criteria for selection, other institutes that were assessed etc. The year for which
the award is received is not mentioned in the certificate. The claim in the advertisement is
not qualified to mention the source and date of the award under which the award was given
to the institute. Hence the claim is not adequately substantiated and is misleading by
ambiguity and omission.

20. S. S. Hospital: The advertisement’s claims (in Hindi), as translated into English, “The only
Centre for High risk Deliveries”, was not substantiated. Also, the claim “Successful Treatment
of infertility in childless couples” is in breach of the law as it violated The Drugs & Magic
Remedies Act. Also, these claims are misleading by exaggeration.

21. Kudos Laboratories India Limited (Kudoos Range of Products): The advertisement’s claims
(in Hindi) as translated into English, “100 Years of Experience”, “In India 1st time untouched
Ayurvedic medicine for Diabetes”, “Human Clinical Trial Tested”, were not substantiated
adequately, and are misleading by exaggeration and implication. In addition, specific to the
claim of treatment and control of diabetes, the advertisement is in breach of the law as it
violated The Drugs & Magic Remedies Act. Also, the advertisement’s claims related to Kudos
Active Slim Tea, “Helpful in weight control”, “Mixture of green tea, long pepper, work and
other 10 ayurvedic medicines”, “Helps in Digestion process”, “Cure in Metabolism”, “Helps
in weight reduce”, “Increase energy - gives stamina” and “Increase immunity - keep away
from disease”, were not substantiated adequately with clinical evidence, and are misleading
by exaggeration.

22. Pretti Slim Clinic: The advertisement’s claims, “Mumbai's No. 1 slimming clinic”, “Lose Belly
Fat And Become Fit”, were not adequately substantiated with comparative data versus other
similar clinics and criteria for selection. Specific to the claim of “Lose belly fat and become fit”,
it was noted that while some fat loss may be possible with treatments, fitness is also achieved
by other means such as healthy lifestyle and exercise regimens etc. Hence, the claim, “Lose
Belly Fat And Become Fit”, was not substantiated with clinical evidence for the services being
offered. The claims as well as the visual in the advertisement – particularly of the male model
shown in a trouser that is very loose at the waist, implying a significant weight loss, is also
misleading.

23. Avion Biotech (K lor Free): The advertisement’s claims (in Gujarati), as translated into English,
“Controls the diabetes by increasing the production of insulin”, was not substantiated with
clinical evidence, and is misleading by exaggeration.

24. Dr. Dassan’s Ayurvedic Herbal (Body Walk Oil): The advertisement’s claims (in Hindi) as
translated into English, “More Active Part BODY WALK OIL and medicine penetrates deep in
to the joints and helps produce cartilage and works on the pain from the roots”, “Now no
need to change your Knee” and “Results in 20 Days or Money Back”, were not substantiated
with clinical evidence of product efficacy. Also, the claims are misleading by exaggeration.

25. Dr. Rana’s Health Care (Gaino Power Powder): The advertisement’s claims (in Hindi), as
translated into English, “We will give you Freedom from Thin Body”, “Tested on more and
more people” and “Shows immediate effect”, were not substantiated and are misleading by
exaggeration.

26. Cadila Healthcare Ltd. (Zydus Acti Life): The advertisement’s claims, “Cholesterol Control”
and “to reduce the cholesterol”, were not substantiated, and are misleading.

27. N.I Education Trust (NIMS Blacumin Tea): The advertisement claims (in Malayalam), as
translated into English, “Blacumin, a solution to every disease, now in tea powder”, “We can
consume Blacumin, which is Natural Immunisation Improve, in the form of Nims Blacumin
Tea”, “Make Nims Tea your habit” and “Stay away from Diseases”, were not substantiated
and are misleading by exaggeration.

FOOD AND BEVERAGES:-
1. B P Food Products Pvt. Ltd. (Double Trishul Atta): The advertisement’s claim (in Hindi) as
translated into English, “The Double Trishul Atta Chakki Fresh Atta is packed with natural food
grade packing material so that the entire family can be protected from many serious diseases”,
was not substantiated and is misleading.

2. Eastern Foods Pvt. Ltd. (Eastern Spices): The advertisement’s claim, “India's No.1 Spice
Company”, was not substantiated with comparative data versus other similar brands in the
same category, and with market share sales data, and is misleading by exaggeration.

3. Organic India Pvt. Ltd. (Organic Ghee): The advertisement’s claims, “100% Organic”, “USDA
Organic”, “From organically raised mother cows" and pack claim in the advertisement “100%
certified organic”, were not adequately substantiated with supporting evidence. Also, these
claims are considered to be misleading by ambiguity.

4. Godfrey Phillips India Ltd. (Pan Vilas Pan Masala): The advertisement’s (Print) claim, “India’s
Most Trusted Brand”, was substantiated but the claim was misleading by omission of the
mention of the specific product category as well as source and date of research and criteria for
assessment for the claim made.

5. Godfrey Phillips India Ltd. (Pan Vilas Pan Masala): The advertisement’s (TVC) claim, “India’s
Most Trusted Brand”, was substantiated, but the claim was misleading by omission of the
mention of the specific product category as well as source and date of research and criteria for
assessment for the claim made.

6. Veekay Natural Foods (Nutri Millets): The advertisement’s claim, “No added maida,
preservatives, cholesterol, transfat”, was not substantiated and is misleading.

7. PepsiCo India Holdings P. Ltd. (Tropicana Litchi Delight): The advertisement on the product
pack of Tropicana Litchi Delight says Litchi Delight and shows dominant image of Litchi with a
subdued image of apple in the background, which is misleading as the name “Litchi Delight” is
inconsistent with the content of the product. It was noted that the product predominantly
delivers the taste of apple juice and the list of ingredients on the pack mention concentrated
apple juice 3.2% and Litchi Pulp 1.8%, which means the apple content, is more than litchi. It
was concluded that the product packaging contravened Chapter I.4 of the ASCI Code and
Clause 8 of the Guidelines on Advertising of Foods & Beverages (“Claims in advertisements
should not be inconsistent with information on the label or packaging of the food or
beverage.”).

8. Bluebird purifier RO water: The claim in the advertisement, “its alkaline minerals protect you
from diseases”, was inadequately substantiated and is misleading by ambiguity as there was
no conclusive evidence to show how the water is richer in alkaline minerals and provides
protection from diseases.

9. Narang Group (Ocean Fruit Water): The advertiser had declared that in the ingredient list on
the label, the quantity of Glucose, Electrolytes and Vitamins are present in each 500ml of
Ocean Fruit Water. But it was noted that while these ingredients are present in the beverage,
the adjective “Packed with” is misleading by exaggeration.

10. I.T.C. Limited (Aashirvaad Sugar Release Control Atta): It was observed in the advertisement
of Aashirvaad Sugar Release Control Atta that the graphical representation indicates the sugar
release pattern of high GI food and the voice over states that the advertised product would not
result in sudden spike in your sugar level. Hence the product description of “Sugar release
control” was considered to be misleading by ambiguity and implication that the low GI atta has
curative property in reducing the overall blood sugar level. Further the advertisement is set in
the context of the protagonist’s husband having high sugar level. While the claim, “Natural
grain mix in the atta ensures your sugar levels do not rise suddenly” holds for the sugar release
from the atta based food, it is likely that the consumers would be misled into believing that the
low GI atta would have beneficial / curative effect on sugar release of other High GI food that
is ingested as well. Also, the claim, “Eat rotis without worrying about sugar levels”, is
misleading by ambiguity as rotis cannot be eaten by diabetics in excess. High intake of
carbohydrates, even though low in GI value, will ultimately increase sugar levels.

11. M.K.Agrotech Pvt. Ltd. Refined (Sunpure Sunflower Oil): The advertisement’s claim that
Sunflower oil has “Natural Oryzanol”, was not substantiated with supporting technical data
and is misleading. It was noted that Oryzanol is available in Rice bran oil and to claim presence
of Natural Oryzanol in Sunflower oil, the manufacturer would have to mix Rice Bran Oil to
Sunflower Oil. Such composition would make it “blended oil” and since the Oil does not say it
is a blended oil, it is very unlikely that Oryzanol is included in the Sunflower oil.

12. Sunnah Enterprises (Barley Sattu): The advertisement’s claims (in Urdu) as translated into
English, “Keeps your weight in control”, “Keep Protection from Sunlight and Heat”, “benefit
in migraine” and “prevent obesity”, were not substantiated with evidence of product efficacy,
and are misleading. It was also noted that the FSSAI number quoted in the advertisement
(13815015000173) was an invalid number.

13. Devyani Food Industries Ltd. (Cream Bell Ice Cream): The advertisement’s claim, “India’s Most
Promising Brand”, was substantiated, but the claim was misleading by omission of the mention
of the specific product category, the year of receipt of award as well as source and date of
research and criteria for assessment for the claim made.

14. Beltek Canadian Wayer Ltd. (Wild Vitamin Drink): The advertisement’s claim that most of the
beverages in the industry contain more than 10 gm of sugar per 100 ml was not substantiated.
Hence, the claim “low sugar” was misleading by ambiguity.

15. Vishnu Pouch Packaging Pvt. Ltd. (Vimal Elaichi): It was observed that the product packaging
of both the products (Vimal Pan Masala and Vimal Elaichi) resembles each other, but the
advertisement of Vimal Elaichi continues to have the same tag-line that was promoted earlier
by the same celebrity protagonist (Ajay Devgan) for the Pan Masala product. Also, while the
product is available for sale only in one state, the advertisement is not restricted to Gujarat
alone. Further, the scale of advertising of the Elaichi product is disproportionate to the
quantities being sold. Hence is was concluded that the Vimal Elaichi advertisement is
misleading by implication and contravened Chapters I.4 and III.6(b) of the ASCI Code (“Whether
there exists in the advertisement under complaint any direct or indirect clues or cues which
could suggest to consumers that it is a direct or indirect advertisement for the product whose
advertising is restricted by this Code.) Also, the 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.”).
16. Green Rev Agro Pvt. Ltd. (Zero Sugar): The advertisement claims, “Balances blood sugar &
lowers your blood pressure”, “Improves immunity”, were not substantiated and are grossly
misleading.

17. VKS Verve Nectars Pvt Ltd (bgood Honey): The advertisement’s claims (in Malayalam), as
translated into English, “Keep you young”, “Reduce Weight, Extra fat”, “Increase Immunity
Power” and “Good for child brain growth”, were not adequately substantiated for the
advertised product with evidence of product efficacy and are misleading.

PERSONAL CARE:

1. Hindustan Unilever Ltd. (Dove Soap): The advertisement claims that that Dove soap is
smoother on skin than all other soaps. They tell people to check soap using litmus paper. The
litmus paper turns blue in all cases except Dove soap. The litmus paper turns blue in case of
other soaps as other soap is basic in nature. It was noted that showing a litmus test as an
indicator for mildness with a voice over “litmus blue ho gaya” is misleading by implication. It
was concluded that the reference to a litmus test to support the claim, “Harsh nahi, gentle
chuniye” was not substantiated adequately, and is misleading.

2. Biotique (Biotique bio kelp Shampoo): The advertisement’s claims, “Clinically tested”, “97
percent reported thicker, fuller, stronger and faster growing hair” and “Thicker, fuller,
healthier hair”, were not substantiated with proof of efficacy for the product, and are
misleading.

3. Nivea India Pvt. Ltd. (Nivea Whitening Cell Repair Body Lotion): The advertisement’s claims
(in Hindi) as translated into English, “Tan Free Skin just in 2 weeks”, was not substantiated
with proof of efficacy for the product, and is misleading.

4. Vini Cosmetics Ltd. (White Tone Powder): It was concluded that the advertiser’s TVC was
similar to the complainant’s earlier run advertisement in general layout, copy, visual
presentations, execution, demographics, and colour scheme, so as to suggest plagiarism.

5. Leeford Healthcare Ltd. (Meglow Fairness Cream for Men): The advertisement’s claims (in
Hindi) as translated into English, “Get Radiant Fairness”, “Get Spotless Face”, “SPF 15 UVA”,
and Pack claim, “Mega Dose Of Skin Whitening Concentrate”, were inadequately
substantiated, and are misleading by exaggeration. While the advertiser presented a clinical
study report, in the context of other claims being objected to, the claim “Clinically certified
formula” was considered to be misleading by ambiguity and implication.

6. Leeford Healthcare Ltd. (Meglow Fairness Cream for Women): The claims in the
advertisement (in Hindi) as translated in English, “Get Radiant Fairness”, “Get Spotless Face”,
Pack claim– “With UVA SPF 15”, were inadequately substantiated, and are misleading by
exaggeration. While the advertiser presented a clinical study report, in the context of other
claims being objected to, the claim “Clinically certified formula” was considered to be
misleading by ambiguity and implication.

7. Oshea Herbals (Oshea Sunblock Cream SPF 40): The advertisement’s claim, “India's Most
Trusted Brand" had a mismatch in the certificate provided by the advertiser and the survey
report provided by IBC infomedia Pvt ltd. The certificate states “Best Skin Care products”
Category whereas the report mentions the category as “Herbal Skin care”. Hence, the claim is
misleading by ambiguity and omission of mention of the specific category. Also, the claim is
not qualified to mention the source and date of research. Further, the claims, “With Oshea
Herbals UVSHIELD get Tan Free Glowing Skin”, “SPF Range “SPF 20, SPF 25, SPF 30, SPF 50”
and “SPF 40”, were not substantiated with evidence of technical evaluation for measurement
of SPF factor in each product and proof of product efficacy and are misleading.

8. Hindustan Unilever Ltd. (Clear Ice Cool Menthol Shampoo) : The advertisement’s claim (in
Kannada), as translated into English, “Keep you fresh for 24 hours”, was not substantiated
adequately, and is misleading in absence of any criteria of comparison.

9. Hindustan Unilever Ltd. (Ponds Men Pollution Control Face Wash): The claim in the
advertisement, “1000 X adsorption power”, is misleading by omission of the mention of the
basis of comparison.

10. Simla Chemicals Pvt. Ltd. (Simco Herbal Shampoo): The advertisement’s claims, “5 Problem
solver- Falling hair, dandruff, weak roots, premature greying, dull and lifeless hair”, “Herbal
Shampoo with extra Conditioner” and “Herbal shampoo for your all hair needs”, were not
substantiated with evidence of product benefits. Also, the claim, “Hair expert since 1948”,
was not substantiated with supporting evidence and is misleading.

CLOTHING & ACCSESORIES:
1. Aliya Shoes: The advertisement showcases the protagonist (a minor girl) sitting on the road
side mending shoes. Hence it was concluded that the advertisement of Aliya shoes is
encouraging / promoting child labour which is in violation of The Child Labour (Prohibition and
Regulation) Act, 1986.

2. Zikimo Trends: The advertisement’s claim, “Full Mirror work Punjabi salwar kameez at Zikimo”
and the visual representation of the product is false and misleading. While the product
claimed to have mirror work, it appeared to have foil work and not mirror work.

3. Letv (Leeco) (Lemax2): The advertisement’s claim, “Watch the bezels disappear Bezel-less
design enters unchartered territory with Le Max2's triple anodic oxidation process to form an
integrated whole - with no distinction between screen surface and phone exterior for a truly
immersive viewing experience” read along with the visual of the product with no bezels is
false and misleading as it did not resemble the actual product provided to the complainant
that has bezels.

4. Jabong.com (Under colours of Benetton trunks for men): The advertisement’s claim, “pack
of 2 Under Colors of Benetton Black Trunk Rs.459”, read in conjunction with the visual showing
only 1 pc of the product advertised, is false and misleading by ambiguity. It was also noted
that the name ‘Under Colors of Benetton’ is not the same as the company ‘United Colors of
Benetton’, hence this could also be a counterfeit/pass-off product.

5. Aero Club Private Limited (Woodland Shoes & Apparels): The advertisement’s claim, “Flat
40% off” announces discount on MRP, where MRP includes all taxes and also is inclusive of
VAT. Based on the calculations provided by the complainant, the net discount being offered
works to only 31%. The “Flat 40% off” claim is misleading by ambiguity as the discount is being
calculated on a reference price which is inclusive of VAT and VAT is in any case being added
post discount.

EDUCATION:
The CCC found following claims in the advertisements by 66 different advertisers were not
substantiated and, thus, violated ASCI Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions. Hence
complaints against these advertisements were UPHELD.
1. Chennais Amirthas Institute of Hotel Management: The advertisement’s (voice over) claims,
“Now what you all will be seeing is our Chennais Amirthas infrastructure”, and the visual
showing the infrastructure of the institute are misleading. Also, the voice over claims of “100”
Job”, “Rs.10, 000/- salary during the course of studies” and “overseas employment after
graduation”, were not substantiated with supporting evidence.

2. P.K. University: The advertisement of P.K. University does not show actual image of the
advertised institute. The picture portrays a grand structure similar to Mysore Palace, which is
false and grossly misleading. The advertisement contravened Clause 4c of the Guidelines for
Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs (“Visual of Infrastructure of the
Institution shown in Advertisement shall be real and existing at the time of ad’s release”)

3. Parul University: The advertisement’s claim, “10,000 + Placements in 500 + Industries”, was
not substantiated with authentic supporting data such as detailed list of students who have
been placed through their Institute, contact details of students for verification, enrolment
forms and appointment letters received by the students. Also, the claim is misleading by
exaggeration. Further the claim, “Recognized by UGC, New Delhi”, was not substantiated with
supporting proof. Also, this claim is misleading as the UGC website shows that the compliance
to UGC visit by UGC expert committee is still pending as substantiated by the complainant.