2025, Vol. 6, Special Issue 3

Globally, intangibles particularly brands now represent a substantial proportion of firm value.

In India, adherence to Ind AS (Indian Accounting Standards) and regulatory frameworks such as Ind AS 38 and Ind AS 103 has escalated the need for rigorous brand valuation practice in financial reporting, M&A, and strategic planning. This study examines the methodologies employed in Indian brand valuations, identifies industry-specific approaches, and discusses challenges and best practices.

Primary data was gathered through analysis of published financial statements, corporate disclosures, and brand-ranking publications (e.g., Interbrand’s 2023 list), while secondary data includes regulatory guidance and industry surveys (e.g., EY’s Purchase Price Allocation study). The analysis focuses on the prevalence and selection of valuation methods cost, market, and income-based and their suitability across consumer goods, technology, financial services, and telecom sectors.

Results indicate that Indian firms predominantly recognize acquired (not internally generated) brands under Ind AS 38, often employing income-based approaches such as

Relief-from-Royalty (RFR). Market comparables appear in sectors with transactional data, e.g., consumer goods, while cost-based approaches serve smaller firms or internal branding efforts. According to EY, around 28% of enterprise value is allocated to identifiable intangibles and 35% to goodwill in Indian M&A deals. Interbrand's 2023 ranking highlights shifting brand valuation trends: TCS leading at ₹1,095.8 billion, followed by Reliance and Infosys.

Challenges identified include: (a) lack of transparent royalty rate data; (b) subjectivity in forecasting cash flows; (c) regulatory complexity; (d) poor consistency in capitalizing brand-development spend as seen in a Reddit example where Emmbi Industries improperly capitalized brand development to inflate earnings. Notably, there remains tension between accounting compliance and marketing-led measurement frameworks (Brand Finance’s marketing paradox)

This paper recommends best practices: (1) develop standard royalty databases in India; (2) adopt multi-factor frameworks (e.g., Interbrand’s Brand Strength Index); (3) enforce regular impairment testing of indefinite-life intangible assets; (4) enhance auditor and valuer training. These will improve comparability, credibility, and strategic utility of brand valuation.

Findings hold implications for CFOs, auditors, regulators (e.g., SEBI), brand consultants, and investors. Improved valuation transparency can support investor trust, M&A efficiency, and strategic brand management across India’s most valuable brands.