Gujarat Cooperative Milk Marketing Federation Limited (GCMMF) - Amul T-Special

Recommendation: Upheld | Medium: Suo Motu - NAMS (TAMS)

The ASCI had approached the advertiser for its response in addressing the objections raised in the complaint. The advertiser was offered an option to seek an Informal Resolution (IR) of the complaint by modifying or withdrawing the claim in the advertisement, or alternately to substantiate the claim with supporting data. The advertiser was also offered an opportunity for a telecon with the ASCI Secretariat, which they did not avail and replied through their advocates seeking for an extension of two weeks time to submit their detailed response. The deadlines stipulated by Consumer Complaints Council (CCC) procedure exist keeping in mind the immediate and widespread impact that advertisements have on the public. Consequently, any action which is needed to be taken with respect to the same is required to be prompt and urgent. It is for this purpose that the deadlines, as stipulated, are set for advertisers/broadcasters etc, and the CCC itself makes it a priority to deal with every complaint before it as expeditiously as possible. As a special gesture, the advertiser was granted an extension of additional three business days to make their submissions. However, the advertiser did not respond within the given timelines. The CCC viewed the print advertisement, considered the complaint and the advertiser’s reply. The CCC noted that the advertiser did not provide supporting data for the claim made. In the absence of claim support data, the CCC concluded that the claim, “Northeast’s No. 1 Milk Powder”, was not substantiated with verifiable comparative data on value and volume share of the advertiser’s milk powder brand (Amul T-Special) versus other similar milk powder brands in the Northeast, to prove that their brand holds the leadership position (No.1). The claim is misleading by exaggeration. The source and date for the claim is not mentioned in the advertisement. The said claim contravened Chapter I, Clauses 1.1, 1.2, and 1.4 of the ASCI Code. This complaint was UPHELD.