https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=178869 Expenditure on the initial registration of an existing trade mark was treated as revenue expenditure because registration under the Trade Marks Act, 1940 only conferred procedural and evidentiary advantages, such as prima facie validity and exclusive use, without creating a new capital asset or enduring capital advantage. The registration fees merely facilitated protection and proof of title to an existing business asset. The court also held that the payment was incurred wholly and exclusively for the assessee's business, as it was made solely to register marks used in the textile business and formed part of the ordinary process of protecting trading assets. The fees were therefore allowable as business expenditure. en-us Mon, 02 Sep 1946 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 21 Nov 2025 18:13:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=178869 Expenditure on the initial registration of an existing trade mark was treated as revenue expenditure because registration under the Trade Marks Act, 1940 only conferred procedural and evidentiary advantages, such as prima facie validity and exclusive use, without creating a new capital asset or enduring capital advantage. The registration fees merely facilitated protection and proof of title to an existing business asset. The court also held that the payment was incurred wholly and exclusively for the assessee's business, as it was made solely to register marks used in the textile business and formed part of the ordinary process of protecting trading assets. The fees were therefore allowable as business expenditure. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 02 Sep 1946 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=178869