I applied the SPICE+ form (only for name reservation) for one of my client companies naming “TEXPODRO CONSULTING PRIVATE LIMITED”. For that application, I received the following response from MCA.
SAYS THAT:
This is to inform you that in terms of Rule 10 of the Companies (Registration Offices and Fees) Rules, 2014, the above-cited Form RUN dated 20/03/2021 filed by vide SRN T12345678 has been examined and marked as Sent for resubmission with the following remarks-
1.The proposed name(s) include(s) the word(s) "TEXPO" is TM in class 42 Appl No: XXXXX others, hence proposed name is/are undesirable as per Rule 8A(1)(b) of Co (Inc) Fifth Amend Rules, 2019.
2. The proposed name(s) is/are identical with / resemble(s) too nearly to the name of an existing Company EXPO CONSULTING PRIVATE LIMITED and others. Hence, it is undesirable as per the provisions of Section 4(2)(a) of the Companies Act, 2013, read with Rule 8 (2)(e) of Co (Inc) Fifth Amend Rules, 2019 Submit NOC from the concerned body corporate through a Board Resolution or apply for fresh name(s) by complying with all the requirements of the Companies Act, 2013 and Rules made thereunder. NOC, as applicable, to be provided along with a clear & legible self-attested copy of PAN card (bearing signature) of the authorized signatory along with PAN of the body corporate.
The first objection related to Trademark, TEXPO, and TEXPODRO, they say that has similarity. How could we justify that both are not the same? Matching all letters between the words does it reasonable. And the company which registered the trademark is operating in German, it doesn’t have any correspondence office in India.
In the second objection, they are saying TEXPOD and EXPO resembling the same. In this case, too they are requesting NoC from the company.
Apart from submitting NoC, do we have any other choice?
Due to client confidentiality, the above names are changed.
CAclubindia
