Assessee is  engaged in international transactions of sale of Paclitaxel and Disodium Pamidronate.  Assessee adopted TNMM as most appropriate method.  TPO rejected TNMM and came to conclusion that it would be CUP method which was liable to be viewed as most appropriate method for purpose of determining ALP and made TP adjustment.  Commissioner(Appeals) held   that TPO had merely relied upon prices prevailing in different markets and regions and had clearly failed to bear in mind factors imbibed in rule 10B(2) and that TPO had simply used database of export rates maintained by IBIS which did not satisfy stringent conditions of comparability regarding CUP Method and since TPO had not satisfied even these basic requirements, TNMM was MAM and since net margins earned from sale of Paclitaxel and Disodium Pamidronate being higher at 14.10 per cent as against other sales at 10.90 per cent, international transaction of sale of Paclitaxel and Disodium Pamidronate satisfied arm’s length principle and it did not warrant an addition as done by TPO.  Tribunal upheld order passed by Commissioner(Appeals). High Court affirmed the order of the Tribunal.