Shampoo advert banned over "stronger hair" claim

The Advertising Standards Authority said, a shampoo ad which claimed the product could make hair "up to 10 times stronger" should be banned for being misleading. The industry watchdog uphold five complaints against the television ad for pantene pro-v shampoo and conditioner, and agreed with two viewers who found it misleading. According to the ad, the product contains, "our first ever formula to help replenish key aminos" and makes hair "up to 10 times stronger" but in reality it was not found so. The scientific expert consulted by ASA did not agree that the shampoo could replenish amino acid. The ASA said viewers could be "mislead" into thinking the amino acids in the product means it would improve their hair strength more than any other shampoo and conditioner. So this false advertisement was banned by ASA due to their false claims. In a statement, Proctor and Gamble said the company was "surprised and disappointed" by the decision of ASA. The ASA has done right by banning this type of ads which claims false things about their products. We can see lots of products which claims that their product is this they can do this but in reality it is not found so. This type of misleading advertisement should be banned by the ASA instantly so that people couldn't be mislead.

In this picture we can see false claims of pantene which misleads people.

 Reference:https://www.independent.co.uk/news/media/shampoo-advert-banned-over-stronger-hair-claim-490294.html?amp

Whistle blower accuses, Infosys of unethical practices to boost numbers

An anonymous group calling itself, "ethical employees" has complained to the board of Infosys and the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) alleging that the company is taking unethical steps to boost short term revenue and profits. Copies of letters sent by the group to both the board of Infosys and the SEC were shared with  ET. In the letter the group alleges that CEO Salil Parekh is bypassing the reviews and approvals for large deals, he (Parekh) directs them to make wrong assumptions to show margin. The letter added that the CEO and CFO Niranjan Roy were pressuring the fiance team to show more profits in their treasury management by taking risks and making changes to policies. They further explained that CFO has not allowed them  to present large deal issues in board presentation. Similarly they ask them to make key disclosure on 20F and annual report and to share only good and incomplete information with investors and analysts. This is a regulatory issue. The letter further stated that the large contracts such as Verizon, Intel, JVS in Japan, ABN AMRO acquisition, revenue recognition matters are not as per accounting standards. Similarly, the letter added that they have mails and voice records and they are ready to share it during investigation. The founder company should properly investigate this and take necessary action against culprit. They should analyze the annual report properly and find the mistake. They can form a audit committee to investigate. 

  Reference:https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/tech/ites/whistleblower-accuses-infosys-of-unethical-practices-to-boost-nos/articleshow/71679710.cms?from=mdr

Bhusan Steel defrauded 33 banks, financial institutions in 7 years

                                 Sanjay Singal

The Enforcement Directorate (ED) has claimed that Bhusan Steel defrauded 33 banks and financial institutions in past 7 years. The ED claimed this in its charge sheet that was filed against Bhusan Power and Steel (BPSL)  in connection with money laundering. In its charge sheet, the ED has named Sanjay Singal,  the then chairman-cum-managing director of Bhusan Steel as the main conspirator behind the fraud. Along with Singal, 23 others have been charged for providing accommodation entries facilitating the process of money laundering. The loan taken from the bank were not used for the purpose they were sanctioned. Similarly, the company has used forged documents for taking loan. The ED claims that they have found evidence of Rs.204.31 crore in the form of immovable properties belonging to the company under the control of Sanjay Singal. The ED had initiated its investigation under PMLA on the basis of FIR filed by CBI on April 5 2019 against Bhusan Steel and others for criminal conspiracy with unknown public servants of banks and other financial institutions. According to my view the chairman should have utilized the money for the it has been sanctioned. This type of unethical issues are seen much more nowadays, government should make strict rules against it. Similarly the banks as well as other financial institutions should cross check the documents before sanctioning loan.

             
                   Reference:https://www.indiatoday.in/business/story/bhushan-steel-defrauded-33-banks-financial-institutions-in-7-years-says-ed-in-chargesheet-1638049-2020-01-18