MAM
Complaints filed against 21 companies and individuals on objectionable and misleading ads
NEW DELHI: A police complaint has been filed in the Gomti Nagar police station in Lucknow against various companies and people with regard to advertisements on sex-power, obesity.
This FIR has been registered on the complaint by Lucknow based IPS officer Amitabh Thakur and social activist Dr Nutan Thakur, who had earlier approached the Lucknow bench of the Allahabad High Court on this issue but were asked by the Court to first approach the police.
Based on their complaint under sections 3/5/7/9/9A Drugs and Magic Remedies (Objectionable Advertisement) Act 1954 has been registered. The accused include a total of 21 companies and individuals like Sri Sai Safed Daag, Capsule More Power, Sex Grow Power, Titanic K 2 Capsule, Yoko Pharmacy, Dr P K Jain Clinic, Dr A K Jain Clinic, Jolly Bawasir, Altaz Dawakhana, Paras Medico, Hashmi Dawakhana, D Fit Capsule, Sanyasi Clinic. Parashuram Ojha is the investigating officer of the case.
The Thakurs had in their public interest litigation appealed that as per section 3 of this Act, no advertisement about increasing sexual pleasure, women menstrual disorder and 54 diseases including diabetes, blindness, deafness, insanity, leucoderma, and obesity can be published while as per section 5, all kinds of magic remedies like talisman, kavach, and tantra is completely prohibited. Section 7 makes their violation a cognizable offence punishable between six months to one year. Justice Uma Nath Singh and Justice Dr Satish Chandra ordered them to avail alternative remedy of registering FIR.
The Bench had said that since the alternative remedy of registering FIR against accused newspapers and companies is available, they should first avail this remedy and they can approach the High Court if they fail to get suitable remedy at that level.
The petitioners had wanted the Information and Broadcasting Ministry, Registrar of Newspapers in India, and the Directorate of Advertising and Visual Publicity to be directed to ensure that such illegal advertisements do not get published in any newspaper or aired TV and all administrative and legal measures should be taken in case of violation.
Brands
Jubilant FoodWorks faces Rs 47.5 crore GST demand, plans appeal
Tax authorities flag alleged misclassification of restaurant services
MUMBAI:Â Jubilant FoodWorks Limited has landed in a tax tussle after receiving a GST demand of Rs 47.5 crore from the office of the additional commissioner of CGST and central excise in Thane, Maharashtra.
The order, issued under the provisions of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, relates to an alleged incorrect classification of certain services under the category of restaurant services. According to the tax authorities, this classification resulted in a short payment of goods and services tax for the period between the financial years 2019-20 and 2021-22.
The demand includes Rs 47.5 crore in GST along with an equal amount as penalty, in addition to applicable interest. The order was received by the company on March 13, 2026.
In a regulatory filing to the BSE Limited and the National Stock Exchange of India Limited, the company said it disagrees with the order and believes its arguments were not adequately considered.
The company is preparing to challenge the decision and plans to file an appeal. It added that once the redressal process is complete, the demand is likely to be dropped.
Despite the sizeable figure attached to the notice, the company said it does not expect any material impact on its financials, operations or other activities.
The disclosure was signed by Suman Hegde, EVP and chief financial officer, who confirmed that the company received the order at 19:06 IST on March 13 and has already initiated steps to contest it.
The development places the quick service restaurant major in the middle of a tax debate that could hinge on how certain restaurant-linked services are classified under GST rules. For now, the company appears ready to take the matter from the tax office to the appeals desk.
