Transfer pricing comparables and adjustments: Tribunal revisits loss-maker status, segmental comparability, working capital relief, and risk allocatio...
The petition challenges registration of a corporate name that is structurally and phonetically identical to an earlier corporate group name where the distinctive element 'REFEX' predominates. The court applied precedents requiring that business dissimilarity is not a proper basis for the Registrar/Regional Director to refuse to act; therefore the administrative refusal was held improper and set aside. The decision recognises prominence of a distinctive word across multiple group companies on the register and treats likelihood of confusion and near-identity with an earlier corporate name and registered trade mark as determinative. Petition allowed and impugned order quashed.
The petition challenges registration of a corporate name that is structurally and phonetically identical to an earlier corporate group name where the distinctive element 'REFEX' predominates. The court applied precedents requiring that business dissimilarity is not a proper basis for the Registrar/Regional Director to refuse to act; therefore the administrative refusal was held improper and set aside. The decision recognises prominence of a distinctive word across multiple group companies on the register and treats likelihood of confusion and near-identity with an earlier corporate name and registered trade mark as determinative. Petition allowed and impugned order quashed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
