https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=206911 The court upheld the Assessing Officer's reference to the Transfer Pricing Officer without a considered opinion and validated the use of the Excess Earning Method for valuing Intellectual Property Rights. Regarding the valuation of IPR, the court directed adjustments in the computation of future cash flows, useful life estimation, discount factor calculation, and return on working capital. The court instructed the Transfer Pricing Officer to recalculate the Arm's Length Price using the Excess Earning Method and specific corrections, allowing the assessee's appeal in part for statistical purposes. en-us Mon, 26 Sep 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 22 May 2013 11:36:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=206911 The court upheld the Assessing Officer's reference to the Transfer Pricing Officer without a considered opinion and validated the use of the Excess Earning Method for valuing Intellectual Property Rights. Regarding the valuation of IPR, the court directed adjustments in the computation of future cash flows, useful life estimation, discount factor calculation, and return on working capital. The court instructed the Transfer Pricing Officer to recalculate the Arm's Length Price using the Excess Earning Method and specific corrections, allowing the assessee's appeal in part for statistical purposes. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 26 Sep 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=206911