ASCI upholds complaints against 114 misleading advertisements in April 2019

During the month of April 2019, ASCI investigated complaints against 206 advertisements, of which 49 advertisements were promptly withdrawn by the advertisers as soon as they received ASCI’s communication. The Consumer Complaints Council (CCC) of ASCI upheld complaints against 114 advertisements out of 157 advertisements evaluated by them. Of these 114 advertisements, 59 belonged to the education sector, 35 belonged to the healthcare sector,  five to personal care, two to the food & beverages sector and 13 were from the ‘others’ category.

The CCC observed that one renowned cricketer was endorsing a prominent brand for a payment gateway, implying leadership claim and presenting the product as a “card”, which was not substantiated and was misleading. A well-known refrigerator brand’s claim of keeping vegetables fresh for up to 30 days was considered to be misleading. In one instance, “100% Genuine Medicines” claim by an online pharmacy was not substantiated with any verifiable supporting data such as a list of registered FDA approved pharmacies supplying the said medicines. A learning app was making a claim of millions of students learning from their app which was not substantiated.

A large number of complaints were pertaining to the education sector wherein the advertisers were making unsubstantiated claims of they being No. 1, winning awards or “100% placement” luring students. The CCC came across a significant number of advertisements of hospitals and clinics making unsubstantiated claims about their services being the best, they being bestowed various awards or the hospitals being able to cure various conditions ranging from infertility to piles, diabetes, HIV and Cancer.

D Shivakumar

D Shivakumar, Chairman, ASCI said, “Over the last three decades, we have worked on many fronts to ensure awareness and acceptance of self-regulation in advertising. More recently ASCI has launched its digital campaign “Self-Regulate before it is too late”, towards encouraging better industry participation for protecting self-regulation of advertising. It is important that advertisers work together with ASCI to build a strong and cohesive self-regulatory ecosystem to ensure that advertising stays trustworthy and independent of external controls.” 

Healthcare: - 35 advertisements complained against

• Direct Complaints (Three advertisements)
• Suo Motu Surveillance by ASCI (32 advertisements)

Education: - 59 advertisements complained against

• Direct Complaints (Four advertisements)
• Suo Motu Surveillance by ASCI (55 advertisements)

Food and Beverages: - 2 advertisements complained against

• Direct Complaints (Two advertisements)

Personal Care: - 5 advertisement complained against

• Direct Complaints (Three advertisement)
• Suo Motu Surveillance by ASCI (Two advertisements)

Others: - 13 advertisements complained against

• Direct Complaints (Eight advertisements)
• Suo Motu Surveillance by ASCI (Five advertisements)

Direct complaints

The advertisements given below were complained against by the general public or by industry members. Of the 70 advertisements complained against, for 8 cases the advertisements were promptly withdrawn by the advertiser on receiving ASCI communication. For the remaining 62 advertisements, complaints against 20 advertisements were upheld by the CCC of which four belonged to the Education sector,  three belonged to Healthcare sector, three to Personal Care sector, two belonged to the Food & Beverages sector,  and eight to the ‘Others’ category.

Education

The CCC found that the claims made in following two advertisements were misleading by exaggeration and exploited consumers’ lack of knowledge and lead to widespread disappointment in the minds of consumers. The advertisements also violated ASCI’s Guidelines for Advertising for Educational Institutions and Programs.

1. Toppr Technologies Pvt Ltd (Toppr Learning App): The print advertisement’s claim, “7 Million students are learning on Toppr” was not substantiated with authentic supporting evidence or with an independent audit or a verification certificate.
2. LegalEdge Tutorials: The advertisement’s claim, “Crack CLAT in 55 Days” was not substantiated with verifiable supporting data. The claim “India’s Best Institute for CLAT” was not substantiated with any market survey data, or with verifiable comparative data of the advertiser’s coaching institute and other similar coaching institutes in India, to prove that it is better than the others in providing coaching for students for CLAT, or through an independent third party validation.

Complaints against advertisements of two educational institutes listed below were UPHELD mainly because they made misleading and unsubstantiated claims such as providing 100% job placement guarantee  OR claiming to be the No.1 in their respective fields.

Goal Institute,

Mumbai College of Hotel Management and Catering Technology.

Following advertisements in the healthcare sector were found to be misleading that exploit consumers’ lack of knowledge and could lead to widespread disappointment in the minds of consumers

1. Meenakshi Mission hospital & research centre: The television advertisement’s claims (as translated to English), “Our Meenakshi Mission hospital, first laparoscopy treatment was done in world level”, “In 1993, world’s first laparoscopy treatment was done to remove lung and liver tumours” and “……. Always first, ……..” were not substantiated with verifiable data such as comparison with other hospitals worldwide to prove that they were the first to perform laparoscopic surgery to remove lung and liver tumours, or any audited market survey data, or through a third-party validation.
2. PharmEasy: The advertisement claim, “100% Genuine Medicines” was not substantiated with any verifiable supporting data such as a list of registered FDA approved pharmacies who have tie-ups with the advertiser and how the advertiser ensures that all medicines supplied are 100% genuine.
3. Sharanya Avenue (Know health- Summer weight loss 2019): The advertisement’s claim, “Up to 10kgs in one month with dietician Neha…!”, was not substantiated their treatment procedure for weight reduction nor did they provide evidence of their customers who achieved the claimed results of over 10 kg weight loss regardless of their physiological status with dietician Neha.  Claim, “1000 plus satisfied clients” was not substantiated with supporting evidence of the clients who have been successfully treated at the advertiser’s clinic. Also the claim, “Top 3 Winner Awards” was not substantiated with copy of the award certificates, details of the criteria for granting the award, references of the award received such as the year, source and category, and details about the awarding body, and is misleading by omission of disclaimer to qualify the same.  

Personal Care

1. Hindustan Unilever Ltd (Indulekha Bringha Shampoo): It was concluded that Indulekha Bringha Hair Cleanser is not directly beneficial for hair growth like Indulekha Bringha oil. The advertisement called out benefits of Indulekha Oil and presented Indulekha Hair Cleanser as additional product.  The Hair cleanser product depicting mnemonic of hair root identical to that shown on the oil product pack and claiming “prevents hair fall” was therefore considered  to be misleading.  The disclaimer in fine print at the back of the package stating `hair fall due to breakage’, was in violation of ASCI Guidelines for Disclaimers.  
2. Hindustan Unilever Ltd (Dove Intense Repair Shampoo & Conditioner): The advertisement’s claim, “New” was not substantiated for the product formulation. The new packaging used a theta sign (θ) on a red background where the word NEW is mentioned; However, it was not shown as to what aspect of the product is new anywhere on the front of the container. On the rear side of the pack, it has been mentioned that NEW refers to ‘New Pack and Formulation’. Furthermore, in the advertisement, although it has been mentioned the word NEW (Naya) means new pack & new formulation, there is nothing to indicate that in fact there is a new formulation. The advertiser did not submit any authentic and verifiable evidence comparing the composition of the old formulation of Dove Intense Repair and the re-launched version. Advertiser did not submit physical sample of the old products as well. It was concluded that the claim “New” was not substantiated for the product formulation and was misleading by implication. The advertisement also contravened ASCI Guidelines on claiming “New/Improved”.
3. Lotus Herbals Ltd (YouthRx Anti-Ageing transforming crème): The advertisement claim, “Contains Ground breaking Gineplex Youth Compound derived from potent natural ingredients that are clinically proven to accelerate lifting and firming”, and “The potent active ingredients include ginseng which activates cell metabolism and boosts collagen production and ginger which has more than 40 antioxidants and milk peptide” were not substantiated with technical details, composition of the product and evidence of product efficacy. The claims are misleading by exaggeration.

Food and Beverage

The CCC found that the claims made in the following two advertisements were misleading that exploit consumers’ lack of knowledge and lead to widespread disappointment in the minds of consumers.

1. Nestle India Ltd. (NesPlus Multigrain Kokos): The advertisement’s claims, “Stays Crunchy even in warm milk” and “Jo Rahega Garam Doodh me bhi Kadak” were supported with data that the product remains “crispy” for up to four minutes in warm milk. Reference to this time period was missing in the advertisement. The TVC and print advertisement was misleading by omission and ambiguity, and in contravention of ASCI Guidelines for Disclaimers.
2. United Breweries Ltd (Kingfisher Radler Bottle Artwork, Kingfisher Radler Lemon Can Artwork): The television advertisement’s claim, “100% natural”, is in violation of the FSSAI Notification dated 19th November 2018 (Schedule V), which refrains advertisers from using “natural” in the advertisement unless it meets certain criteria. As per the FSSAI Notification “Composite foods cannot be described directly or by implication as `natural’ but may be described as `made from natural ingredients’. Based on this observation, it was concluded that the claim, “100% Natural” for this composite beverage was misleading and is in contravention of the ASCI Code.

Others

The CCC found that the claims made in the following seven advertisements were misleading that exploit consumers’ lack of knowledge and lead to widespread disappointment in the minds of consumers.

1. Eureka Forbes Ltd. (Dr. Aquaguard NRICH range of ROs): The advertisement’s claim, “Optimum amount of Micronutrients” / “Balanced Copper in Every Drop” was unsubstantiated and misleading by implication.  The product configuration is based on BIS Standards and not on RDA standards, therefore, claims are related to safety and not to nutrients. The claim “Get equivalent power of dry-fruits” was not adequately substantiated as the composition as well as the overall bioavailability and nutritional value of ROs and Dry Fruits products are not comparable. The claim “Equipped with most advanced Patented Technologies Active Copper Maxx, Biotron and Mineral Guard” was misleading by implication as the grant for the patent is still under process.
2. Mastercard India: The television advertisement’s claim with celebrity MS Dhoni, “Bharat Ka Card”, implies leadership claim which was not substantiated, and is misleading by ambiguity. It was observed that while the advertiser has taken a stance that their Mastercard is a payment gateway, the visual in the TVC shows a physical card. Also it was observed that there was no evidence showing the Celebrity, Mr. M.S. Dhoni had done due diligence prior to the endorsement. There was a violation of Guidelines for Celebrities in Advertising.
3. Times Network Ltd (ET Now): The channel in their promos circulated the BARC data claim to be the No.1 channel starting 14th Feb 2019 during Week 6,7,8,9 & 10. The BARC advisory dated 31^st January 2019 which was updated on 14^th February 2019, was applicable during the period of the advertisement complained against. In the context of impermissible use of BARC data, the CCC concluded that the TV Promos contravened Chapter I.3 of the ASCI Code.
4. Paisabazaar Marketing and Consulting Private Limited: The advertisement’s claim, “2 minute mein loan approval” (“Loan Approval* in 2 minutes”) regardless of the disclaimer, “…..*Provisional Loan Approval in 2 minutes”, is misleading as the key operative word “provisional” is missing in the voice over itself. The claim, “Loan Approval in 2 Minutes “with the protagonist categorically stating “fatafat paisa aapke account mein”, implies that the money would be available in the person’s account as quick as in two minutes, whereas the actual fact is that the transfer of money could take up to ten days. Any normal Customer is bound to believe that the Loan will be approved in two minutes and amount will be credited almost immediately. The advertisement is misleading by ambiguity and implication. 
5. IPSIT Group (IPSIT Projects): The hoarding advertisement’s claiming, “Tax Free Homes* – *Free Stamp Duty Registration & GST” at Palghar was misleading. The free stamp duty registration and GST was available to customers who purchase the flat at the given rate and not at a negotiated rate. The terms and conditions for the offer were not readily available for the customer or on the advertiser’s website.  
6. Brandzstorm India Marketing Pvt. Ltd.  (Luxxuberance): The advertisement’s claim, “India’s first multi brand handbag and accessories store”  was not substantiated with any verifiable comparative data nationwide, of the advertiser’s store and other similar stores to prove that they are the first store in India that sells multi brand handbags and accessories. The claim is misleading by exaggeration.
7. Voltas Ltd. (Voltas Beko Refrigerator): The advertisement’s claim, “…tees din tak sabziyaan fresh rahengi”, (Vegetables will remain Fresh up to 30 days) was not substantiated, and is misleading by ambiguity, implication, and exaggeration. The disclaimer in the advertisement talks of `specific vegetables’ remaining fresh which is contradictory to the voiceover and main message conveyed of keeping vegetables’ fresh, implying that all vegetables will remain fresh. Additionally the disclaimers in the TVC were not in the same language as the audio of the TVC (Hindi) hence contravened ASCI Guidelines for Disclaimers.
8. RSPL Limited (*) (Xpert Dishwash Bar): The YouTube and website advertisement claim, “Big Saver Pack” was misleading. The older “four bar” pack (sold as a 3+1 free) weighs the same as the new “3 bar” pack. Hence, there is no saving delivered by the new pack, and this claim misleading by distortion of facts, as there is no saving delivered by the new pack.

Suo Motu Surveillance by ASCI for misleading advertisements

The advertisements given below were picked up through ASCI’s Suo Motu surveillance of Print and TV media via the National Advertisement Monitoring Services (NAMS) project. Out of 136 advertisements that were picked, 41 cases were informally resolved wherein the advertisers confirmed that the advertisement is being withdrawn immediately post receiving the complaints. Of the 95 advertisements, complaints against 94 advertisements were upheld. Of these 94 advertisements, 55 belonged to the Education sector, 32 advertisements belonged to the Healthcare sector, two belonged to the Personal Care category and five belonged to the ‘Others’ category.

The CCC found that the claims made in the following 20 advertisements were misleading claims that exploit consumers’ lack of knowledge and lead to widespread disappointment in the minds of consumers.

1. Vansh Clinic and Test Tube Baby Center: The advertisement claim, “Continuous successful results in the field of infertility for the past 16 years”. The advertiser did not explain what they mean by “continuous successful results” and did not provide details for the last 16 years.  For their claim, “Women who had suffered miscarriages 4-10 times and had given up after taking treatment for 15-20 years, have also conceived”, the advertiser did not provide details or clinical evidence whether such results have been achieved on a consistent basis over a statistically significant number of patients meeting the stated criteria. The claims are misleading by ambiguity and implication.
2. Apex Hospital: The advertisement claim, “Freedom from joint and spine related problem”, was not substantiated with supporting credible scientific/clinical evidence, and is misleading by gross exaggeration. The claim, “The only centre in Purvanchal with 10,000 replacement”, was not substantiated with verifiable comparative data of the advertiser’s hospital and other similar hospitals treating joints and spine problems in Purvanchal, to prove that they are the only hospital who have done 10,000 replacement surgeries, or a third party validation, and is misleading by exaggeration.
3. Apex Hospital: The advertisement claim, “Jeevan ki nayi aashaa har Cancer rogi ke liye” (New hope of life for every cancer patient) implies that the hospital is providing cure for Cancer, which is misleading by implication.
4. Bhatwal Surgical and Maternity Hospital: The advertisement claim, (in Marathi) “Bariatric surgerychya madatiney ….Diabetes (madhumeh) saarkhyai aajharaachi aushadhey dekil bandh howoo shaktat” (“With the help of Bariatric surgery, medicines for disease such as diabetes can be stopped”), was inadequately substantiated with supporting clinical evidence and is misleading by omission, implication and exaggeration.  
5. Hakh Research & Medical Foundation: The advertisement claims, (in Marathi) as translated in English, “Guarantee of complete protection from HIV as well as cure from HIV” and “Treatment can be stopped if HIV DNA-PCR report is negative”, were not substantiated with supporting clinical evidence and imply guaranteed cure for HIV which is misleading by gross exaggeration. 
6. Park Hospital: The advertisement claim, “Best hospital for kidney transplant surgery in Panipat”, was not substantiated with any market survey data, or any verifiable comparative data of the advertiser’s hospital and other similar hospitals in Panipat, to prove that they are better than all the other hospitals in providing kidney transplant surgeries, or through an independent third party validation. The claim is misleading by exaggeration.
7. Sahara Hospital: The advertisement’s claim, “Best Multi Speciality Hospital in Non - Metro across India”, “Best Multispecialty Hospital in Uttar Pradesh National Quality Excellence Award” was not substantiated with any market survey data or verifiable comparative data of the advertiser’s hospital and other similar multi-speciality hospitals in non-metro areas across India, to prove that they are better than the rest, or through an independent third party validation. Moreover, the award claim was not substantiated with copy of the award certificates, details of the criteria for granting the award, references of the award received such as the year, source and category, and details about the awarding body, and is misleading by omission of disclaimer to qualify the same.
8. Dr. Kamthe Piles Clinic:  The advertisement’s claim, “Only 1 hour treatment” was not substantiated with supporting clinical evidence. The claim “India Book of Records of providing treatment on 208 patients in 11 hours”, was not substantiated with copy of the award certificates, criteria for granting the awards, references of the awards received such as the year, source, and details of the awarding body. The source for the claim was not indicated in the advertisement.  The claims are misleading by gross exaggeration and exploit consumers’ lack of knowledge and are likely to lead to grave or widespread disappointment in the minds of consumers (especially piles patients).
9. GPT Healthcare Pvt Ltd (ILS Hospitals): The advertisement’s claim, “Most awarded hospital for obesity correction surgery in Eastern India”, was not substantiated with verifiable comparative data to prove that the advertiser’s hospital has won more awards for obesity correction surgery than any other hospitals providing obesity correction surgeries, in Eastern India, or through a third-party validation. The claim is misleading by exaggeration.
10. Global Hospitals: The advertisement’s claim, “Best liver transplant centre of West India with more than 300 liver transplants”, was not supported with any support data or evidence of comparison with other liver transplant centres in West India, to prove that they are better than the rest in providing more than 300 liver transplant surgeries, nor a third party audited report as supporting evidence. “India's Best H.B.P.” is an absolute claim which was not substantiated with any market survey data, or with verifiable comparative data of the advertiser’s hospital and similar hospitals in India, to prove that they are better than the rest for H.B.P. or through an independent third party validation. The claims are misleading by gross exaggeration.
11. Abhijay Hospital Private Limited – ARC International Fertility & Research Centre : The advertisement’s claim, "India’s leading Fertility Hospital.", was not substantiated with any verifiable comparative data of the advertiser’s hospital and other similar hospitals to prove that it is in leadership position (No.1) than the rest in providing treatment for fertility, or through a third-party validation. "A complete solution For Fertility”, implies guaranteed cure for infertility, which was not substantiated with supporting evidence. The claims are misleading by exaggeration and implication.
12. Size Zero Slimming Centre: The advertisement claim, “Guaranteed Weight Loss”, was not substantiated and is misleading by exaggeration. The visual in the advertisement implies a significant weight loss around tummy would be feasible, which is also grossly misleading. The claim, “Best and most Latest Therapy” was not substantiated with any evidence of the services available at the centre and basis for claiming them to the best or the latest.  The claim is misleading by exaggeration.
13. Derma Klinic: The advertisement’s claim, “Ranked No.1 as per All India Lifestyle Hospital/ Clinic Survey 2016”, was not substantiated with verifiable comparative data for the ranking claimed as per the survey quoted. The award claim was not substantiated with  copy of the award certificates, details of the criteria for granting the award, category for which the award received, survey methodology, parameters considered, questionnaires used, names of other similar hospitals or clinics that were part of the survey and outcome of the survey. The source for the claim was not indicated in the advertisement.  Moreover, the award granted to advertiser’s clinic was made three years ago and has since been superseded by the awards in 2017 and 2018. The claim is misleading by exaggeration.
14. Homeopathy Care N Cure: The advertisement’s claim, "Complete solution on problems like Ovarian cyst, lump in breast or uterus, problem of migraine or depression, leucorrhoea, irregular or painful menstruation, problem of menopause through Homeopathic medicines is possible”, was not substantiated with supporting clinical evidence, and is misleading by gross exaggeration. The word `Cure’ in the advertiser’s clinic name “Homeopathy Care N Cure”, is also misleading by implication.
15. Sagar Malik Ayurveda: The advertisement’s claim, (in Hindi) “12 saal purani reed ki haddi theek” (“Cured 12 year old spinal cord pain”), was not substantiated with supporting clinical evidence, and with treatment efficacy data. The claim is misleading by gross exaggeration. 
16. Akash Naturopathy Clinic: The advertisement’s claim, “Successful treatment of paralysis”, was not substantiated with supporting clinical evidence, and is misleading by gross exaggeration.

The following advertisements were 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:

The CCC found that the claims made in the following 18 advertisements were misleading that exploit consumers’ lack of knowledge and lead to widespread disappointment in the minds of consumers. Most of the claims were misleading by exaggeration / implication. The advertisements were also found to be in violation of ASCI Guidelines for Advertising for Educational Institutions.

1. Aptech Limited (*) Arena Animation Academy: The advertisement’s claim, “Learn from the global leader” was not substantiated with any verifiable comparative data of the advertiser’s institute and other similar institutes or any market research survey to prove that they are in global leadership position (No.1) in providing courses in Graphics, Web Design, Film Making, Animation & Visual Effects or through a third-party validation.
2. Ananya Academy: The advertisement claim, “An institution providing most success in U.P.” was not substantiated with any market survey data, comparative data of the advertiser’s institute and other similar institutes in UP, to prove that they are better than the rest in providing success for CTET coaching.
3. Extreme Classes Junior Wing: The advertisement claim, “The most reliable and result oriented coaching institute in Bareilly” was not substantiated with any market research data, or  verifiable comparative data of the advertiser’s institute and other similar institutes in Bareilly, to prove they are  the most reliable / trusted, in providing coaching to their students, or through a third party validation.
4. Institute of Commerce & Maths (ICM): The advertisement claim, “Join the best to be the best” was not substantiated with market survey data, or with verifiable comparative data of the advertiser’s institute and other similar institutes, to prove that their institute is better than the rest in providing coaching for various professional courses and competitive exams, or through an independent third party validation. 
5. Adhigam Coaching: The advertisement claim, “Rajasthan's Best Educational Institute” was not substantiated with market survey data, or verifiable comparative data of the advertiser’s institute and similar institutes in Rajasthan, to prove that their institute is better than the rest in providing coaching for competitive exams for government jobs, or through an independent third party validation.
6. Aditya Educational Institution-Aditya Academy: The advertisement claim, “Best preparatory school for +2/ JEE Main/ Advanced/ NEET/ AIIMS and CA-CPT”, was not substantiated with any market survey data, or with verifiable comparative data of the advertiser’s academy and other institutes, to prove that they are better than the rest in providing courses for JEE Main/ Advanced/ NEET/ AIIMS and CA-CPT entrance examinations, or through an independent third party validation. 
7. Aspirant Entrance Coaching: The advertisement claim, “The leading coaching centre in Trivandrum”, was not substantiated with any verifiable comparative data of the advertiser’s coaching centre and similar institutes in Trivandrum, to prove that they are leading in providing entrance coaching for NEET/JEE/AIIMS/JIPMER exams among all other centres. 
8. Afairs Exhibitions Pvt Ltd: The advertisement claim, “Gurugram's Most Trusted Exhibition on Schools Admission”, was not substantiated with any market survey data, or with verifiable comparative data of the advertiser’s exhibition and other similar exhibitions conducted on schools admission, in Gurugram, to prove that they are most trusted than the rest, or through a third party validation. 
9. Indian Institute of Tourism and Travel Management: The advertisement claim, “Leading Government Institute of Tourism & Travel in South Asia with best placement record”, was not substantiated with verifiable comparative data.
10. JP Institute: The advertisement claim, “Only reliable institute of Madhya Pradesh”, was not substantiated with any verifiable comparative data of the advertiser’s institute and other similar institutes, to prove that only they are reliable than the rest in providing MPPSC / UPSC foundation courses and crash courses.  The claim is misleading by exaggeration and implication.
11. Itihas Bodh Sansthan: The advertisement’s claim, “The only reliable institute for Main exams since 25 years”, was not substantiated with any market research data, or verifiable comparative data on year on year basis since the last 25 years as claimed, of the advertiser’s institute and other similar institutes, to prove they are the only reliable institute, in providing coaching to their students for Civil Services – Main exams, or through a third party validation.
12. International Institute of Hotel Management (IIHM): The advertisement’s claim, “India's largest hotel school chain” was not substantiated with any verifiable comparative data of the advertiser’s hotel school chain and other hotel school chains in India, to prove that they are larger than the rest, or through an audited report or third-party validation.
13. Kid’s Pride: The advertisement’s claim, “Awarded Excellence in Play School” was not substantiated with copy of the award certificates, details of the criteria for granting the award, references of the awards received such as the year, source, category, and details about the awarding body, the source for the claim was not indicated in the advertisement.
14. Career Power: The advertisement’s claim, “Only institute which has given highest selections in Haryana” was not substantiated with any verifiable supporting data or evidence of comparison with other coaching institutes in Haryana, to prove that only they have given the highest selection of students in government or bank jobs through various competitive exams.
15. Ascent Career Point: The advertisement’s claim, “The most trusted Academic System” was not substantiated with any market survey data, or with verifiable comparative data of the advertiser’s academic system and academic systems of other similar institutes, to prove that their academic system is the most trusted compared to others, or through a third party validation.
16. Career Classes: The advertisement’s claim, “Coaching institute providing highest selection” was not substantiated with any verifiable support data or evidence of comparison with other coaching institutes, to prove that they have given highest selection of students for the career courses mentioned in the advertisement.
17. Planet Kids: The advertisement’s claim, “Award winning pre-school chain” was inadequately substantiated. The claim was not qualified to mention the source and date of awards.
18. IAS Hotspot: The advertisement’s claim, “Kerala's biggest residential hub for civil service preparation” was not substantiated with data to conclusively prove that the residential services provided by the advertiser’s institute are the biggest in Kerala as compared to other institutes offering similar facilities, or through an independent third-party validation.

Complaints against advertisements of 37 educational institutes listed below are UPHELD mainly because of unsubstantiated claims AND/OR misleading claims that they provide 100% placement/100% placement assistance AND/OR they claim to be the No.1 in their respective fields.

Sarvodaya Skill Development Center, Shri Krishna Nurses Bureau and Education Academy, Infogro Technologies, International Institute of Goat Management (IIGMA), Kimberley The International School, Global Engineering College, Global Indian International School, Lamba Coaching College, Varanasi Institute of Paramedical,  Shivaji Institute, Kovai CNC College, Akshar International School, 99 Institute of Beauty & Wellness, FAME College - Faculty of Arts, Management & Engineering, Shri Krishna Coaching Centre, Muppadai Training Centre, RGR Academy, Koshi Science Classes, G. D. Goenka Public School, Divya Jyoti (D.J.) College of Dental Sciences & Research, Dalhousie Hilltop School, Best Computer College, G D Goenka Public School, S. Tech School, MBM Gurukul, Success Point, Saarathi Academy, Momentum Academy, Institute for Competitive Exams, Kisan IAS, Shanti Educational Initiatives Ltd - Shanti Juniors, Prashant Mane's Design Studio, Planet Kids, NEET Sure, Nagaji Institute of Technology & Management and Sai Gurukul.

Personal Care

1. Plattformno1.com (Baha Musk Melon Facial Massage Kit): The advertisement claim, (in Marathi) as translated to English, “Removes tanning, wrinkles” was not substantiated with product efficacy data, and is misleading by gross exaggeration. The claim is likely to lead to grave or widespread disappointment in the minds of consumers.
2. Plattformno1.com (Orachic Gold Facial Kit): The advertisement claim, (in Marathi) as translated in English “Gives freedom from spots” was not substantiated with product efficacy data, and is misleading by exaggeration. The advertiser did not provide Copy of Product approval license / product label, and Product composition details.

Others

The CCC found that the claims in the following four advertisements were misleading and exploited consumers’ lack of knowledge leading to widespread disappointment in the minds of consumers

1. Mohini Knitwears: The advertisement claim, “India's Biggest Woollen Knitwears House” was not substantiated with any support data or evidence of comparison with other similar knitwear stores to prove that their woollen knitwear house was the biggest as compared to other woollen knitwear houses in India, or through a third-party verification. The claim was misleading by exaggeration.
2. Triveni Almirah: The advertisement claim, “India's No.1 Domestic Almirah” was not substantiated with any verifiable comparative data of the advertiser’s product and other Domestic Almirah products in India, to prove that they are in leadership position (No.1), or through a third party validation. The source for the claim was not indicated in the advertisement. Claims, “Most Trusted Brand Award- 2017”, “Best Industries Award- 2008”, and “Best Innovation Award- 2015”, were not substantiated with copy of the award certificates, details of the criteria for granting the awards, references of the awards received such as the year, source and category, and name of the awarding bodies. 
3. Cosmo Electro Industries Pvt Ltd- Kolors Krest : The advertisement’s claim, “India's Most Promising Brands 2017” claim was with respect to advertiser’s product (Kolors Krest modular frames) the advertiser did not provide copy of the award certificate, details of the process as to how the selection was done i.e. survey methodology, details of survey data, criteria used for evaluation, parameters considered, questionnaires used, names of other similar modular and non-modular switch producers that were part of the survey, and the outcome of the survey. The claim is misleading by exaggeration.
4. Singla Builders and Promoters Limited (SBP City of Dreams): The advertisement’s claim, “The No.1 Housing Company in Punjab.” was not substantiated with any verifiable comparative data of the advertiser’s company and other housing companies in Punjab, to prove that they are in the leadership position (No.1) in real estate sector offering living spaces at competitive prices, or through a third party validation. The claim is misleading by exaggeration and implication.
5. Anandi Atta Chakki Pvt Ltd: The advertisement claim, “Only Atta Chakki Giving 100% Result in Bajri” was not substantiated with any market survey data or with comparative data of the advertiser’s product and other Atta Chakki products, to prove their grinder’s performance and efficiency in giving 100% result in Bajri and how it is unique to their Atta Chakki alone. The claim is misleading by exaggeration.

Info@BestMediaInfo.com