This Dataset contains company, company brand, product name, complaint type, subject, recommendation, guideline type, guideline violation, media type wise complaints registered with Advertising Standards Council of India (ASCI) Note: case_created_date and case_updated_date are as per Advertising Standards Council of India Website
| fiscal_year | case_created_date | case_updated_date | case_id | company_name | brand_name | product_name | complaint_status | complaint_type | resolution | subject | recommendation | guideline_type | guideline_violation | media_type | notes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025-26 | 30-05-2025 | 30-05-2025 | 2025-5-15-2-C.41558 | Elitesgrid Private Limited | Elites Grid | CAT | Resolution | Industry Member | Informal Resolution | The the website of Elites Grid- CAT (2506-CCC.07) | The advertiser promptly assured compliance and confirmed that the advertisement withthe claim/s 500+ selections in 2018 and 500+ selections in 2019 has been withdrawn. | Digital Media | |||
| 2025-26 | 30-05-2025 | 30-05-2025 | 2025-4-1-2-FTC.40593 | Nivea India Private Limited | Nivea | Nivea Luminous 630° Even Glow Oil Control Serum | Resolution | Industry Member | Upheld | The Fast Track Complaints Review (FTC-R) panel through a personal hearing, heard the arguments of the complainant and the advertiser. The complainant and the advertiser was present during the deliberations to present their submissions via telecon/meeting with the FTC-R panel. The technical expert who reviewed the supporting evidence provided to the FTC-R panel was present during the deliberations.(2505-FTC-R.02) | The FTC-R panel viewed the advertisement and considered the complainant’s and the advertiser’s submissions for Review. Claim – Most effective anti-spot ingredient (Disclaimer: *Amongst Nivea Products) The FTC-R panel referred to the FTC panel’s earlier recommendation which concluded that the claim refers specifically to the ingredient – Thiamidol, and highlights its proven effectiveness in reducing pigmentation. This was supported by in-vitro studies using human tyrosinase and 3D skin models, along with clinical studies showing significant spot reduction. The FTC-R panel observed that while the complainant has submitted a research paper analyzing the effectiveness of 14 molecules in reducing UV daylight-induced pigmentation, the advertiser has tested their ingredient against the top 20 anti-spot ingredients. The FTC-R panel further observed that the complainant has raised a concern about certain pathways not being considered while evaluating the efficacy of Thiamidol. It was discussed that the downstream protein of all these pathways is tyrosinase; therefore, tyrosinase inhibition is the appropriate parameter chosen by the advertiser to evaluate melanin and spot reduction. Regardless of the cause of the spot, the result is the melanin production which leads to pigmentation. Whether the mechanism involves inhibition of tyrosinase or binding with melanin precursors, the outcome is a reduction in melanin content. The FTC-R panel observed that the advertiser has submitted clinical study results. The findings confirm the superiority of Thiamidol over untreated skin as well as over Hydroquinone, the gold standard for hyperpigmentation. The results also demonstrate Thiamidol’s efficacy in treating pigmentation in darker skin types over a 24-week period. The FTC-R panel further observed that the complainant has referred to an in-vivo study claiming that Melasyl outperformed 4% Hydroquinone. However, no published details or information on the study design has been provided. The FTC-R panel discussed that Melasyl is an ingredient that works differently from Thiamidol. Although both the ingredients help reduce melanin, the new information provided on Melasyl, despite its different mechanism, does not contradict the clinical evidence already presented for Thiamidol. After reviewing the advertiser’s and the complainant’s submission, the FTC-R panel was of the view that there was no new or relevant information to change the earlier recommendation. Based on this assessment, the FTC-R panel concluded that the claim, Most effective anti-spot ingredient, was substantiated. The earlier decision of complaint being Not Upheld stands. The FTC-R panel observed that the claim stating, Most effective anti-spot ingredient, which is an ingredient-based claim, tested against the top anti-spot ingredients, was substantiated. However, the accompanying disclaimer, Amongst Nivea Products, is likely to create confusion in the minds of consumers, as it appears to limit the scope of the claim only to Nivea’s product range. The FTC-R panel further observed that the disclaimer text is too small, unclear, and not distinct from the background to be easily read. Claims - Proven continuous results* [In 2 weeks, dark spots+ are visibly lightened. After 12 weeks 100% of women reported a reduction of their dark spots+. Continuous improvement with regular usage] (Disclaimer: * Based on study conducted by SPINCONTROL ASIA Co., Ltd. in Sep'22, Individual results may vary.) The FTC-R panel referred to the FTC panel’s earlier recommendation, which reviewed clinical data submitted by the advertiser supporting the product’s efficacy in reducing hyperpigmentation and improving overall skin tone. The FTC-R panel further observed that in support of their claim, the advertiser has submitted published clinical studies supporting the efficacy of Thiamidol over a 24-week period in treating moderate to severe melasma. These included trials with female participants and showed significant improvement with continued use. The FTC-R panel further was of the view that the claim of "continuous improvement" is reasonably interpreted as referring to the 2–12 week usage period, and does not imply permanent results.Based on this assessment, the FTC-R panel concluded that the claim, Proven continuous results* [In 2 weeks, dark spots+ are visibly lightened. After 12 weeks 100% of women reported a reduction of their dark spots+. Continuous improvement with regular usage], was substantiated. The earlier decision of complaint being Not Upheld stands. The ASCI Secretariat noted that the complainant has submitted additional data after the FTC-R meeting, including clinical data on Melasyl. Since this information was shared post meeting, it was not included during the panel’s deliberation. | Hoardings | media_type: Packaging, Digital Media | ||
| 2025-26 | 28-05-2025 | 28-05-2025 | 2025-5-26-2-C.42275 | Network FP | Network FP | Network FP- QPFP | Resolution | Industry Member | Informal Resolution | The LinkedIn advertisement is by Network FP- QPFP (2506-CCC.07) | The advertiser promptly assured compliance and confirmed that the advertisement has been withdrawn. | Digital Media | |||
| 2025-26 | 28-05-2025 | 28-05-2025 | 2025-5-26-2-C.42273 | Network FP | Network FP | Network FP- QPFP | Resolution | Industry Member | Informal Resolution | The LinkedIn advertisement is by Network FP- QPFP (2506-CCC.07) | The advertiser promptly assured compliance and confirmed that the advertisement has been withdrawn. | Digital Media | |||
| 2025-26 | 28-05-2025 | 28-05-2025 | 2025-5-26-2-C.42272 | Network FP | Network FP | Network FP- QPFP | Resolution | Industry Member | Informal Resolution | The LinkedIn advertisement is by Network FP- QPFP(2505-CCC.07) | The advertiser promptly assured compliance and confirmed that the objected advertisement has been withdrawn. | Digital Media | |||
| 2025-26 | 27-05-2025 | 28-05-2025 | 2025-5-27-6-C.42464 | Stake | Stake (multiple betting games) | Resolution | Suo Motu - NAMS (TAMS) | Upheld Direct Violation of the law | The Instagram advertisement is by Stake. The said advertisement is in contravention of Chapter III of the ASCI Code (2505-CCC.06). | The Instagram advertisement is by Stake (2505-CCC.06). The Consumer Complaints Council (CCC) considered it to be prima facie in contravention of Chapter III of the ASCI Code. | Digital Media | ||||
| 2025-26 | 27-05-2025 | 28-05-2025 | 2025-5-27-6-C.42463 | Stake | Stake (Snakes) | Resolution | Suo Motu - NAMS (TAMS) | Upheld Direct Violation of the law | The Instagram advertisement is by Stake. The said advertisement is in contravention of Chapter III of the ASCI Code (2505-CCC.06). | The Instagram advertisement is by Stake (2505-CCC.06). The Consumer Complaints Council (CCC) considered it to be prima facie in contravention of Chapter III of the ASCI Code. | Digital Media | ||||
| 2025-26 | 27-05-2025 | 28-05-2025 | 2025-5-27-6-C.42461 | Stake | Stake | Resolution | Suo Motu - NAMS (TAMS) | Upheld Direct Violation of the law | The Instagram advertisement is by Stake. The said advertisement is in contravention of Chapter III of the ASCI Code (2505-CCC.06). | The Instagram advertisement is by Stake (2505-CCC.06). The Consumer Complaints Council (CCC) considered it to be prima facie in contravention of Chapter III of the ASCI Code. | Digital Media | ||||
| 2025-26 | 27-05-2025 | 28-05-2025 | 2025-5-27-6-C.42459 | Stake | Stake (Plinko) | Resolution | Suo Motu - NAMS (TAMS) | Upheld Direct Violation of the law | The Instagram advertisement is by Stake. The said advertisement is in contravention of Chapter III of the ASCI Code (2505-CCC.06). | The Instagram advertisement is by Stake (2505-CCC.06). The Consumer Complaints Council (CCC) considered it to be prima facie in contravention of Chapter III of the ASCI Code. | Digital Media | ||||
| 2025-26 | 27-05-2025 | 28-05-2025 | 2025-5-27-6-C.42456 | Stake | Stake (Mines) | Resolution | Suo Motu - NAMS (TAMS) | Upheld Direct Violation of the law | The Instagram advertisement is by Stake. The said advertisement is in contravention of Chapter III of the ASCI Code (2505-CCC.06). | The Instagram advertisement is by Stake (2505-CCC.06). The Consumer Complaints Council (CCC) considered it to be prima facie in contravention of Chapter III of the ASCI Code. | Digital Media |
Ministry of Consumer Affairs Food and Public Distribution. Status of Advertisement Complaints Registered with Advertising Standards Council of India (ASCI) [Data set]. Dataful. https://dataful.in/datasets/20112
