Vitamin C Daily Glow Serum with Turmeric
A brightening serum using Sodium Ascorbyl Phosphate as its Vitamin C source, a stable derivative that converts to active Vitamin C on skin at a partial yield. Turmeric root extract and Niacinamide are positioned high in the formula, confirming both are present at functional concentrations. The main visible concern is Parfum listed as a single undisclosed ingredient in a daily leave-on face serum, without any individual allergen components named. No published test reports are publicly accessible for key claims.

- Post-acne marks and dark spots
- Daily Use
- Melanin Rich Skin
- Contains Fragrance
- You have fragrance sensitivities
- Active % Not Verified
₹399-499 • Analysed 10 June 2026
Sodium Ascorbyl Phosphate is more heat-stable than L-Ascorbic Acid, which is a genuine advantage in India's warm climate where pure Vitamin C oxidises rapidly. The conversion step means results build more slowly than serums using 3-O-Ethyl Ascorbic Acid. Particularly useful for Fitzpatrick III-V skin for mild post-inflammatory hyperpigmentation reduction. Fragrance sensitivity can be heightened in hot weather when skin is flushed and more permeable. Consumers with reactive or atopic skin should consider patch testing before daily use.
This is a web evidence review, not a Clean Sheet certification. We checked the ingredient list, publicly available test reports, marketing claims, and formula logic using only public information available at the time of review.
At a glance
What was checked
Fair
What was checked
The brand states 10% Vitamin C but uses Sodium Ascorbyl Phosphate, a pro-vitamin that converts to active Vitamin C on skin at partial yield. The implied potency comparison with L-Ascorbic Acid or EAA is not publicly substantiated.
MADE SAFE certification is real, publicly verifiable, and excludes a defined list of harmful chemicals. It does not substantiate efficacy claims.
No test report with lab name, method, sample size, or result is publicly accessible. The badge alone does not meet the standard for Evidence visible.
Parfum is present in the ingredient list. Toxin-free has no regulatory definition and does not constitute a verifiable safety claim.
The breakdown
Public Evidence Score across 5 pillars. Open any row for the full rationale.
Ingredient SafetyGood
Full INCI is publicly available on mamaearth.in.
Full INCI is publicly available on mamaearth.in. No EU Annex II prohibited substances, no restricted parabens, no formaldehyde releasers, and no sulfates were found. Sodium Ascorbyl Phosphate has a well-established safety record. The main concern from the public ingredient list is Parfum, present in a daily leave-on face serum as a single undisclosed entry. Fragrance blends can contain dozens of individual chemical compounds, including common sensitisers such as limonene, linalool, citral, and geraniol. Under the expanded EU fragrance allergen framework, brands are expected to name individual allergens above threshold concentrations, but no fragrance components are named in this product. For a serum with all-day skin contact, the allergen identity of the fragrance blend cannot be confirmed from public data. This is a meaningful gap for consumers with sensitive or atopic skin, and it sits awkwardly alongside the brand's toxin-free positioning.
Formula LogicStrong
Aqua first, Sodium Ascorbyl Phosphate appearing very early in the list is consistent with it being the dominant active.
Aqua first, Sodium Ascorbyl Phosphate appearing very early in the list is consistent with it being the dominant active. Turmeric root extract and Niacinamide both appear well above the preservative system, suggesting functional concentrations. Glycerin, Sodium Hyaluronate, Aloe, and Panthenol fill a supporting hydration and barrier role. The preservation system uses Phenoxyethanol with Ethylhexylglycerin, which is a standard and adequate approach for an aqueous leave-on formula. Parfum appears after the preservative system, indicating a trace concentration, which is typical for added scent. SAP is a stable form in aqueous systems, unlike L-Ascorbic Acid, so no packaging-related stability concern arises here. Formula pH is not disclosed publicly, and pH affects how well Niacinamide and the preservation system perform.
Claims EvidenceFair
The full ingredient list is publicly available.
The full ingredient list is publicly available. Active concentrations are not disclosed. No published test reports for dermatologist-tested, clinically proven, or hypoallergenic claims are accessible on the brand website or product page. The brand's MADE SAFE certification is real and excludes a defined list of harmful chemicals, but MADE SAFE does not substantiate efficacy claims. The 10% Vitamin C marketing claim likely refers to Sodium Ascorbyl Phosphate, but SAP requires conversion on skin and the effective brightening yield reaching skin cells is a fraction of what the label implies. This partial bioavailability compared to 3-O-Ethyl Ascorbic Acid or L-Ascorbic Acid is not communicated to consumers. Niacinamide is present but its concentration is not confirmed. The Turmeric brightening claim is heritage-based and not substantiated by clinical evidence at leave-on serum concentrations from public sources. Toxin-free is not a defined regulatory term and adds no verifiable consumer protection.
Test TransparencyGrade CFair
Full INCI is on mamaearth.in and is largely consistent across Nykaa and Amazon listings, which confirms basic ingredient transparency.
Full INCI is on mamaearth.in and is largely consistent across Nykaa and Amazon listings, which confirms basic ingredient transparency. MADE SAFE certification is real and publicly verifiable. No published test reports for product-level claims such as dermatologist tested, clinically proven, or hypoallergenic are accessible. Parfum is listed without any individual fragrance compound names, which is a transparency gap. Active concentrations for Vitamin C and Niacinamide are not publicly disclosed. No batch or expiry traceability information is visible. The brand earns a Grade C: some transparency through INCI disclosure and third-party certification, but no method, lab name, or clinical result is publicly visible.
Consumer ClarityGood
Application instructions and frequency guidance are present on the product page.
Application instructions and frequency guidance are present on the product page. Suitability for skin types is communicated. However, no explicit warning about fragrance allergen risk is present, no caveat about SAP bioavailability versus L-Ascorbic Acid appears on pack, and no layering guidance for consumers using this alongside other actives is provided.
Ingredient list
Good
Ingredient list
| Ingredient |
|---|
Aqua |
Sodium Ascorbyl Phosphate |
Curcuma Longa Root Extract |
Niacinamide |
Glycerin |
Sodium Hyaluronate |
Aloe Barbadensis Leaf Extract |
Panthenol |
Allantoin |
Carbomer |
Xanthan Gum |
Phenoxyethanol |
Ethylhexylglycerin |
Parfum |
Sodium Hydroxide |
Citric Acid |
INCI order as declared on packaging. Position reflects approximate concentration (high to low).
Regulatory screen
Review
Regulatory screen
No obvious public red flag found
No obvious public red flag found. Mamaearth is a CDSCO-registered brand under Honasa Consumer Ltd.
No obvious public red flag found
No obvious public red flag found
No obvious public red flag found
No obvious public red flag found
No obvious carcinogenicity flag found
No obvious public red flag found
Not triggered
Triggered. Curcuma Longa Root Extract is an Ayurvedic botanical relevant to NHPID review.
Flags are based on publicly available INCI only. Not a substitute for full regulatory compliance review.
Claims checked
Fair
Claims checked
The brand states 10% Vitamin C but uses Sodium Ascorbyl Phosphate, a pro-vitamin that converts to active Vitamin C on skin at partial yield. The implied potency comparison with L-Ascorbic Acid or EAA is not publicly substantiated.
Mentioned only
MADE SAFE certification is real, publicly verifiable, and excludes a defined list of harmful chemicals. It does not substantiate efficacy claims.
Evidence visible
No test report with lab name, method, sample size, or result is publicly accessible. The badge alone does not meet the standard for Evidence visible.
Mentioned only
Parfum is present in the ingredient list. Toxin-free has no regulatory definition and does not constitute a verifiable safety claim.
Missing
What would strengthen this review
Public evidence the brand could provide to close verification gaps
- ○Formula pH is not publicly disclosed. This matters because Niacinamide stability and preservative efficacy both depend on pH, and SAP conversion rate is also pH-dependent.
- ○Active concentrations for Sodium Ascorbyl Phosphate and Niacinamide are not stated publicly. Without confirmed percentages, the strength of brightening claims cannot be independently verified.
- ○No individual fragrance allergen components are named in the ingredient list. EU Regulation 2023/1545 expects named allergens above threshold concentrations in leave-on products. Publishing the full fragrance breakdown would close this transparency gap.
- ○No published test report is publicly accessible for the dermatologist tested or clinically proven claims. A report with lab name, method, sample size, and result would allow these claims to be independently assessed.
This assessment is based only on publicly available INCI, claims, and test evidence. It is not a full Clean Sheet certification. Full certification requires confidential formula review, exact concentrations, supplier documentation, manufacturing records, packaging compatibility, preservative efficacy, stability, and complete claim validation.
Are you the brand? If you have published test data or want to request a re-review, write to us at hello@thecleansheet.in.
Full methodology
- What global regulations say about each ingredient
- What toxicology evidence shows at cosmetic concentrations
- What formula concentration context changes
- What the product format and leave-on contact time changes
- What the stated user group needs
- What published test evidence confirms
- What the brand is claiming vs what evidence supports