SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, DC 20549

 

FORM 20-F

o		REGISTRATION STATEMENT PURSUANT TO SECTION 12(b) OR 12(g) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

þ		ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

For the fiscal year ended March 31, 2007

o		TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

For the transition period from _________ to _________

o		SHELL COMPANY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

WNS (Holdings) Limited

(Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in Its Charter)

Not Applicable (Translation of Registrant’s Name Into English)		Jersey, Channel Islands (Jurisdiction of Incorporation or Organization)

Gate 4, Godrej & Boyce Complex
Pirojshanagar, Vikhroli(W)
Mumbai 400 079, India
(91-22) 4095-2100
(Address and Telephone Number of Principal Executive Offices)

Securities registered or to be registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:

		Name of Each Exchange
Title of Each Class		on Which Registered
American Depositary Shares, each represented by		The New York Stock Exchange
one Ordinary Share, par value 10 pence per share

Securities registered or to be registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act:
None
(Title of Class)

Securities for which there is a reporting obligation pursuant to Section 15(d) of the Act
None
(Title of Class)

     Indicate the number of outstanding shares of each of the issuer’s classes of capital or common stock as of the close of the period covered by the annual report.

     As of March 31, 2007, 41,842,879 ordinary shares, par value 10 pence per share, were issued and outstanding, of which 18,607,728 ordinary shares were held in the form of 18,607,728 American Depositary Shares, or ADSs. Each ADS represents one ordinary share.

     Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act. Yes o       No þ

     If this report is an annual or transition report, indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Yes o       No þ

     Note — Checking the box above will not relieve any registrant required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 from their obligations under those Sections.

     Indicate by check mark whether the registrant: (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes þ       No o

     Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, or a non-accelerated filer. See definition of “accelerated filer and large accelerated filer” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. (Check one):

Large accelerated filer o       Accelerated filer o       Non-accelerated filer þ

     Indicate by check mark which financial statement item the registrant has elected to follow. Item 17 o Item 18 þ

     If this report is an annual report, indicate by check mark if the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act). Yes o       No þ

 

 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

WNS (HOLDINGS) LIMITED

				Page
PART I
ITEM 1.		IDENTITY OF DIRECTORS, SENIOR MANAGEMENT AND ADVISERS		2
ITEM 2.		OFFER STATISTICS AND EXPECTED TIMETABLE		2
ITEM 3.		KEY INFORMATION		2
ITEM 4.		INFORMATION ON THE COMPANY		17
ITEM 4A.		UNRESOLVED STAFF COMMENTS		35
ITEM 5.		OPERATING AND FINANCIAL REVIEW AND PROSPECTS		35
ITEM 6.		DIRECTORS, SENIOR MANAGEMENT AND EMPLOYEES		54
ITEM 7.		MAJOR SHAREHOLDERS AND RELATED PARTY TRANSACTIONS		67
ITEM 8.		FINANCIAL INFORMATION		69
ITEM 9.		THE OFFER AND LISTING		70
ITEM 10.		ADDITIONAL INFORMATION		71
ITEM 11.		QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK		94
ITEM 12.		DESCRIPTION OF SECURITIES OTHER THAN EQUITY SECURITIES		95
PART II
ITEM 13.		DEFAULTS, DIVIDENDS ARREARAGES AND DELINQUENCIES		96
ITEM 14.		MATERIAL MODIFICATIONS TO THE RIGHTS OF SECURITY HOLDERS AND USE OF PROCEEDS		96
ITEM 15.		CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES		96
ITEM 16A.		AUDIT COMMITTEE FINANCIAL EXPERT		97
ITEM 16B		CODE OF ETHICS		97
ITEM 16C.		PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTANT FEES AND SERVICES		97
ITEM 16D.		EXEMPTIONS FROM THE LISTING STANDARDS FOR AUDIT COMMITTEES		98
ITEM 16E.		PURCHASES OF EQUITY SECURITIES BY THE ISSUER AND AFFILIATED PURCHASERS		98
PART III
ITEM 17.		FINANCIAL STATEMENTS		98
ITEM 18.		FINANCIAL STATEMENTS		98
ITEM 19.		EXHIBITS		99
SIGNATURES				102
INDEX TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS				F-1
EX-4.1 Share Purchase Agreement dated April 20, 2007 among, WNS Mauritius, Marketics and the selling shareholders named therein
EX-4.2 Lease Deed dated January 25, 2006 between DLF Cyber City and WNS Global Services (Private) Ltd.
EX-4.5 Leave and License Agreement dated November 10, 2005 between GBMC and WNS Global with respect to the lease of the office premises of 4,867 sq ft at Plant 10
EX-4.6 Leave and License Agreement dated November 10, 2005 between GBMC and WNS Global with respect to the lease of office premises of 20,360 sq ft at Plant 10
EX-4.8 Leave and License Agreement dated December 29, 2006 between Sofotel and WNS Global with respect to the lease of office premises of 36,500 sq ft in the Commercial Office Building
EX-4.9 Leave and License Agreement dated December 29, 2006 between Sofotel and WNS Global with respect to the lease of office premises of 35,930 sq ft in the Commercial Office Building
EX-4.10 Leave and License Agreement dated December 29, 2006 between Sofotel and WNS Global with respect to the lease of office premises of 35,870 sq ft in the Commercial Office Building
EX-4.11 Leave and License Agreement dated December 29, 2006 between Sofotel and WNS Global with respect to the lease of office premises of 34,500 sq ft in the Commercial Office Building
EX-8.1 List of subsidiaries of WNS (Holdings) Limited
EX-12.1 Certification by the Chief Executive Officer to 17 CFR 240, 15d-14(a) as adopted pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
EX-12.2 Certification by the Chief Financial Officer to 17 CFR 240, 15d-14(a) as adopted pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
EX-13.1 Certification by the Chief Executive Officer to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
EX-13.2 Certification by the Chief Financial Officer to 18 U.S.C. section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
EX-15.1 Consent of Ernst & Young, independent registered public accounting firm

CONVENTIONS USED IN THIS ANNUAL REPORT

In this annual report, references to “US” are to the United States of America, its territories and its possessions. References to “UK” are to the United Kingdom. References to “India” are to the Republic of India. References to “$” or “dollars” or “US dollars” are to the legal currency of the US and references to “Rs.” or “rupees” or “Indian rupees” are to the legal currency of India. References to “pound sterling” or “£” are to the legal currency of the UK. References to “pence” are to the legal currency of Jersey, Channel Islands. Our financial statements are presented in US dollars and are prepared in accordance with US generally accepted accounting principles, or US GAAP. References to a particular “fiscal” year are to our fiscal year ended March 31 of that year. Any discrepancies in any table between totals and sums of the amounts listed are due to rounding. Names of our clients are listed in alphabetical order in this annual report, unless otherwise stated.

We also refer in various places within this annual report to “revenue less repair payments,” which is a non-GAAP measure that is calculated as revenue less payments to automobile repair centers and more fully explained in “Item 5. Operating and Financial Review and Prospects.” The presentation of this non-GAAP information is not meant to be considered in isolation or as a substitute for our financial results prepared in accordance with US GAAP.

We also refer to information regarding the business process outsourcing industry, our company and our competitors from market research reports, analyst reports and other publicly available sources. Although we believe that this information is reliable, we have not independently verified the accuracy and completeness of the information. We caution you not to place undue reliance on this data.

SPECIAL NOTE REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

This annual report contains “forward-looking statements” that are based on our current expectations, assumptions, estimates and projections about our company and our industry. The forward-looking statements are subject to various risks and uncertainties. Generally, these forward-looking statements can be identified by the use of forward-looking terminology such as “anticipate,” “believe,” “estimate,” “expect,” “intend,” “will,” “project,” “seek,” “should” and similar expressions. Those statements include, among other things, the discussions of our business strategy and expectations concerning our market position, future operations, margins, profitability, liquidity and capital resources. We caution you that reliance on any forward-looking statement involves risks and uncertainties, and that although we believe that the assumptions on which our forward-looking statements are based are reasonable, any of those assumptions could prove to be inaccurate, and, as a result, the forward-looking statements based on those assumptions could be materially incorrect. These factors include but are not limited to:

•

technological innovation;

•

telecommunications or technology disruptions;

•

future regulatory actions and conditions in our operating areas;

•

our dependence on a limited number of clients in a limited number of industries;

•

our ability to attract and retain clients;

•

our ability to expand our business or effectively manage growth;

•

our ability to hire and retain enough sufficiently trained employees to support our operations;

•

negative public reaction in the US or the UK to offshore outsourcing;

•

regulatory, legislative and judicial developments;

•

increasing competition in the business process outsourcing industry;

•

political or economic instability in India, Sri Lanka and Jersey;

•

worldwide economic and business conditions; and

•

our ability to successfully consummate strategic acquisitions.

These and other factors are more fully discussed in “Item 3. Key Information — D. Risk Factors,” “Item 5. Operating and Financial Review and Prospects” and elsewhere in this annual report. In light of these and other uncertainties, you should not

conclude that we will necessarily achieve any plans, objectives or projected financial results referred to in any of the forward-looking statements. Except as required by law, we do not undertake to release revisions of any of these forward-looking statements to reflect future events or circumstances.

PART I

ITEM 1. IDENTITY OF DIRECTORS, SENIOR MANAGEMENT AND ADVISERS

Not applicable.

ITEM 2. OFFER STATISTICS AND EXPECTED TIMETABLE

Not applicable.

ITEM 3. KEY INFORMATION

A. Selected Financial Data

The selected consolidated statement of operations data presented below for fiscal 2007, 2006 and 2005, and the selected consolidated balance sheet data as of March 31, 2007 and 2006, have been derived from our consolidated financial statements included elsewhere in this annual report. The selected consolidated statement of operations data presented below for fiscal 2004 and 2003 and the selected consolidated balance sheet data as of March 31, 2005 and 2004 have been derived from our consolidated financial statements which are not included in this annual report. Our consolidated financial statements are prepared and presented in accordance with US GAAP. Our historical results do not necessarily indicate our results expected for any future period.

You should read the following information in conjunction with “Item 5. Operating and Financial Review and Prospects,” and our consolidated financial statements included elsewhere in this annual report.

		For the Year Ended March 31,
		2007				2006				2005				2004				2003
		(US dollars in millions, except share and per share data)
Consolidated Statement of Operations Data:
Revenue		$	352.3			$	202.8			$	162.2			$	104.1			$	54.6
Cost of revenue(1)			271.2				145.7				140.3				89.7				42.8
Gross profit			81.1				57.1				21.9				14.4				11.8
Operating expenses:
Selling, general and administrative expenses(1)			52.5				36.3				24.9				18.8				10.9
Amortization of intangible assets			1.9				0.9				1.4				2.6				1.8
Operating income (loss)			26.8				19.9				(4.4	)			(7.0	)			(0.9	)
Other income, net			2.5				0.5				0.2				0.3				0.3
Interest expense			(0.1	)			(0.4	)			(0.5	)			(0.1	)			(0.1	)
Income (loss) before income taxes			29.2				19.9				(4.7	)			(6.8	)			(0.7	)
Provision for income taxes			(2.6	)			(1.6	)			(1.1	)			0.0				(1.0	)
Net income (loss)		$	26.6			$	18.3			$	(5.8	)		$	(6.7	)		$	(1.7	)
Income (loss) per share/ADS:
Basic		$	0.69			$	0.56			$	(0.19	)		$	(0.22	)		$	(0.07	)
Diluted		$	0.65			$	0.52			$	(0.19	)		$	(0.22	)		$	(0.07	)
Weighted-average shares/ADSs outstanding (basic)			38,608,188				32,874,299				30,969,658				30,795,888				26,243,833
Weighted-average shares/ADSs outstanding (diluted)			41,120,497				35,029,766				30,969,658				30,795,888				26,243,833

		As of March 31,
		2007				2006				2005				2004
		(US dollars in millions)
Consolidated Balance Sheet Data:
Assets
Cash and cash equivalents		$	112.3			$	18.5			$	9.1			$	14.8
Bank deposits			12.0				—				—				—
Accounts receivable, net			40.6				28.1				25.2				18.1
Other current assets(2)			18.5				10.8				9.7				9.5
Total current assets			183.4				57.4				44.0				42.5
Deposits and deferred tax asset			6.2				4.3				2.6				1.3
Goodwill and intangible assets, net			44.5				42.5				26.7				27.6
Property and equipment, net			41.8				30.6				24.7				15.3
Total assets			275.9				134.8				98.0				86.6
Liabilities and Shareholders’ Equity
Note payable			—				—				10.0				—
Total current liabilities			63.4				53.3				54.8				39.4
Deferred tax liabilities — non-current			0.0				2.3				—				—
Other non-current liabilities(3)			7.0				1.0				0.2				0.5
Total shareholders’ equity			205.5				78.2				43.0				46.7
Total liabilities and shareholders’ equity			275.9				134.8				98.0				86.6

The following tables set forth for the periods indicated selected consolidated financial data:

		For the Year Ended March 31,
		2007				2006				2005				2004				2003
		(US dollars in millions, except percentages and employee data)
Other Consolidated Financial Data:
Revenue		$	352.3			$	202.8			$	162.2			$	104.1			$	54.6
Gross profit as a percentage of revenue			23.0	%			28.1	%			13.5	%			13.8	%			21.6	%
Operating income (loss) as a percentage of revenue			7.6	%			9.8	%			(2.7	)%			(6.7	)%			(1.6	)%
Other Unaudited Consolidated Financial and Operating Data:
Revenue less repair payments(4)		$	219.7			$	147.9			$	99.0			$	49.9			$	25.6
Gross profit as a percentage of revenue less repair payments			36.9	%			38.6	%			22.1	%			28.9	%			46.1	%
Operating income (loss) as a percentage of revenue less repair payments			12.2	%			13.4	%			(4.4	)%			(14.1	)%			(3.6	)%
Number of employees (at period end)			15,084				10,433				7,176				4,472				2,348

		For the Year Ended March 31,
		2007				2006				2005				2004				2003
		(US dollars in millions)
Cost of revenue		$	1.0			$	0.1			$	0.0			$	0.0			$	0.0
Selling, general and administrative expenses			2.7				1.8				0.2				0.2				0.1

		For the Year Ended March 31,
		2007				2006				2005				2004				2003
		(US dollars in millions)
Revenue		$	352.3			$	202.8			$	162.2			$	104.1			$	54.6
Less: Payments to repair centers.			132.6				54.9				63.2				54.2				29.0
Revenue less repair payments		$	219.7			$	147.9			$	99.0			$	49.9			$	25.6

We have two reportable segments for financial statement reporting purposes — WNS Global BPO and WNS Auto Claims BPO. In our WNS Auto Claims BPO segment, we provide claims handling and accident management services, where we arrange for automobile repairs through a network of repair centers. In our accident management services, we act as the principal in our dealings with the repair centers and our clients. The amounts invoiced to our clients for payments made by us to repair centers is reported as revenue. Since we wholly subcontract the repairs to the repair centers, we use revenue less repair payments as a primary measure to allocate resources and measure operating performance.

Revenue less repair payments is a non-GAAP measure. We believe that the presentation of this non-GAAP measure in this annual report provides useful information for investors regarding the financial performance of our business and our two reportable segments. See “Item 5. Operating and Financial Review and Prospects — Results by Reportable Segment.” The presentation of this non-GAAP information is not meant to be considered in isolation or as a substitute for our financial results prepared in accordance with US GAAP. Our revenue less repair payments may not be comparable to similarly titled measures reported by other companies due to potential differences in the method of calculation.

B. Capitalization and Indebtedness

Not applicable.

C. Reasons for the Offer and Use of Proceeds

Not applicable.

D. Risk Factors

This annual report contains forward-looking statements that involve risks and uncertainties. Our actual results could differ materially from those anticipated in these forward-looking statements as a result of a number of factors, including those described in the following risk factors and elsewhere in this annual report. If any of the following risks actually occur, our business, financial condition and results of operations could suffer and the trading price of our ADSs could decline.

Risks Related to Our Business

We may be unable to effectively manage our rapid growth and maintain effective internal controls, which could have a material adverse effect on our operations, results of operations and financial condition.

Since we were founded in April 1996, and especially since Warburg Pincus & Co., or Warburg Pincus, acquired a controlling stake in our company in May 2002, we have experienced rapid growth and significantly expanded our operations. Our revenue has grown at a compound annual growth rate of 47.4% to $352.3 million in fiscal 2007 from $162.2 million in fiscal 2005. Our revenue less repair payments has grown at a compound annual growth rate of 49.0% to $219.7 million in fiscal 2007 from $99.0 million in fiscal 2005. We have established delivery centers in four locations in India, in Sri Lanka and in the UK. Our employees have increased to 15,084 as of March 31, 2007 from 7,176 as of March 31, 2005. In fiscal 2008, we intend to set up new delivery centers in Pune, Mumbai, Gurgaon and Bucharest. We intend to continue expansion in the foreseeable future to pursue existing and potential market opportunities.

This rapid growth places significant demands on our management and operational resources. In order to manage growth effectively, we must implement and improve operational systems, procedures and internal controls on a timely basis. If we fail to implement these systems, procedures and controls on a timely basis, we may not be able to service our clients’ needs, hire and retain new employees, pursue new business, complete future acquisitions or operate our business effectively. Failure to effectively transfer new client business to our delivery centers, properly budget transfer costs or accurately estimate operational

costs associated with new contracts could result in delays in executing client contracts, trigger service level penalties or cause our profit margins not to meet our expectations or our historical profit margins. As a result of any of these problems associated with expansion, our business, results of operations, financial condition and cash flows could be materially and adversely affected.

A few major clients account for a significant portion of our revenue and any loss of business from these clients could reduce our revenue and significantly harm our business.

We have derived and believe that we will continue to derive in the near term a significant portion of our revenue from a limited number of large clients. For fiscal 2007 and 2006, our five largest clients accounted for 55.2% and 41.0% of our revenue and 45.7% and 52.8% of our revenue less repair payments. Our contracts with one of our major clients, AVIVA, provide the client options, exercisable at the client’s election with six months’ notice, to require us to transfer the relevant projects and operations of our facilities at Sri Lanka and Pune to this client. On January 1, 2007, AVIVA exercised its call option requiring us to transfer the Sri Lanka facility to AVIVA effective July 1, 2007. For fiscal 2007, 2006 and 2005, the Sri Lanka facility accounted for 1.9%, 3.3% and 1.1% of our revenue, respectively, and 3.0%, 4.5% and 1.7% of our revenue less repair payments, respectively. AVIVA’s call option regarding the Pune facility, if exercised, would require us to transfer the facility at Pune to AVIVA on or after December 31, 2007. AVIVA may give us notice to exercise its call option regarding the Pune facility at any time on or after July 1, 2007. For fiscal 2007, 2006 and 2005, the Pune facility accounted for 5.2%, 6.5% and 5.1% of our revenue, respectively, and 8.3%, 8.8% and 8.4% of our revenue less repair payments, respectively. See “— We may lose some or all of the revenue generated by one of our major clients.”

In addition, the volume of work performed for specific clients is likely to vary from year to year, particularly since we may not be the exclusive outside service provider for our clients. Thus, a major client in one year may not provide the same level of revenue in any subsequent year. The loss of some or all of the business of any large client could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition and cash flows. A number of factors other than our performance could cause the loss of or reduction in business or revenue from a client, and these factors are not predictable. For example, a client may demand price reductions, change its outsourcing strategy or move work in-house. A client may also be acquired by a company with a different outsourcing strategy that intends to switch to another business process outsourcing service provider or return work in-house.

We may lose some or all of the revenue generated by one of our major clients.

Our contracts with one of our five largest clients, AVIVA, to provide business process outsourcing services grant AVIVA the option, exercisable at AVIVA’s election with six months’ notice, to require us to transfer the relevant projects and operations of our facilities at Sri Lanka and Pune to this client. On January 1, 2007, AVIVA exercised its call option requiring us to transfer the Sri Lanka facility to AVIVA effective July 1, 2007. Effective July 1, 2007, we will lose all revenues generated by the Sri Lanka facility and this will negatively impact our revenues and result of operations. For fiscal 2007, 2006 and 2005, the Sri Lanka facility accounted for 1.9%, 3.3% and 1.1% of our revenue, respectively, and 3.0%, 4.5% and 1.7% of our revenue less repair payments, respectively. If the option to transfer the Pune facility is exercised, we will be required to transfer the AVIVA Pune facility to AVIVA on or after December 31, 2007 and we lose all revenue from AVIVA. AVIVA may give us notice to exercise its call option regarding the Pune facility at any time on or after July 1, 2007. For fiscal 2007, 2006 and 2005, the Pune facility accounted for 5.2%, 6.5% and 5.1% of our revenue, respectively, and 8.3%, 8.8% and 8.4% of our revenue less repair payments, respectively. This loss of revenue would have a material impact on our business, results of operations, financial condition and cash flows, particularly during the quarter in which the options takes effect.

We may in the future enter into similar contracts with other clients, in which case we would be subject to risks similar to those described above.

Our revenue is highly dependent on a few industries and any decrease in demand for outsourced services in these industries could reduce our revenue and seriously harm our business.

A substantial portion of our clients are concentrated in the travel industry and the banking, financial services and insurance, or BFSI, industry. In fiscal 2007 and 2006, 22.8% and 33.1% of our revenue and 36.6% and 45.4% of our revenue less repair payments were derived from clients in the travel industry. During the same periods, clients in the BFSI industry contributed 61.8% and 55.6% of our revenue and 38.7% and 39.1% of our revenue less repair payments. Our business and growth largely depend on continued demand for our services from clients in these industries and other industries that we may target in the future, as well as on trends in these industries to outsource business processes. A downturn in any of our targeted industries, particularly

the travel or BFSI industries, a slowdown or reversal of the trend to outsource business processes in any of these industries or the introduction of regulation which restricts or discourages companies from outsourcing could result in a decrease in the demand for our services and adversely affect our results of operations.

Other developments may also lead to a decline in the demand for our services in these industries. For example, consolidation in any of these industries or acquisitions, particularly involving our clients, may decrease the potential number of buyers of our services. Any significant reduction in or the elimination of the use of the services we provide within any of these industries would result in reduced revenue and harm our business. Our clients may experience rapid changes in their prospects, substantial price competition and pressure on their profitability. Although such pressures can encourage outsourcing as a cost reduction measure, they may also result in increasing pressure on us from clients in these key industries to lower our prices, which could negatively affect our business, results of operations, financial condition and cash flows.

Our senior management team and other key team members in our business units are critical to our continued success and the loss of such personnel could harm our business.

Our future success substantially depends on the continued service and performance of the members of our senior management team and other key team members in each of our business units. These personnel possess technical and business capabilities including domain expertise that are difficult to replace. There is intense competition for experienced senior management and personnel with technical and industry expertise in the business process outsourcing industry, and we may not be able to retain our key personnel. Although we have entered into employment contracts with our executive officers, certain terms of those agreements may not be enforceable and in any event these agreements do not ensure the continued service of these executive officers. The loss of key members of our senior management or other key team members, particularly to competitors, could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition and cash flows.

We may fail to attract and retain enough sufficiently trained employees to support our operations, as competition for highly skilled personnel is intense and we experience significant employee attrition. These factors could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition and cash flows.

The business process outsourcing industry relies on large numbers of skilled employees, and our success depends to a significant extent on our ability to attract, hire, train and retain qualified employees. The business process outsourcing industry, including our company, experiences high employee attrition. In fiscal 2007, our attrition rate for associates (employees who execute business processes for our clients following their completion of a six-month probationary period) was approximately 43% which we believe is broadly in line with our peers in the offshore business process outsourcing industry. There is significant competition in India for professionals with the skills necessary to perform the services we offer to our clients. Increased competition for these professionals, in the business process outsourcing industry or otherwise, could have an adverse effect on us. A significant increase in the attrition rate among employees with specialized skills could decrease our operating efficiency and productivity and could lead to a decline in demand for our services.

In addition, our ability to maintain and renew existing engagements and obtain new businesses will depend, in large part, on our ability to attract, train and retain personnel with skills that enable us to keep pace with growing demands for outsourcing, evolving industry standards and changing client preferences. Our failure either to attract, train and retain personnel with the qualifications necessary to fulfill the needs of our existing and future clients or to assimilate new employees successfully could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition and cash flows.

Wage increases in India may prevent us from sustaining our competitive advantage and may reduce our profit margin.

Salaries and related benefits of our operations staff and other employees in India are among our most significant costs. Wage costs in India have historically been significantly lower than wage costs in the US and Europe for comparably skilled professionals, which has been one of our competitive advantages. However, because of rapid economic growth in India, increased demand for business process outsourcing to India and increased competition for skilled employees in India, wages for comparably skilled employees in India are increasing at a faster rate than in the US and Europe, which may reduce this competitive advantage. In addition, if the US dollar or the pound sterling declines in value against the Indian rupee, wages in the US or the UK will decrease relative to wages in India, which may further reduce our competitive advantage. We may need to increase our levels of employee compensation more rapidly than in the past to remain competitive in attracting the quantity and quality of employees that our business requires. Wage increases may reduce our profit margins and have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and cash flows.

Our operating results may differ from period to period, which may make it difficult for us to prepare accurate internal financial forecasts and respond in a timely manner to offset such period to period fluctuations.

Our operating results may differ significantly from period to period due to factors such as client losses, variations in the volume of business from clients resulting from changes in our clients’ operations, the business decisions of our clients regarding the use of our services, delays or difficulties in expanding our operational facilities and infrastructure, changes to our pricing structure or that of our competitors, inaccurate estimates of resources and time required to complete ongoing projects, currency fluctuation and seasonal changes in the operations of our clients. For example, our clients in the travel industry experience seasonal changes in their operations in connection with the year-end holiday season and the school year, as well as episodic factors such as adverse weather conditions or strikes by pilots or air traffic controllers. Transaction volumes can be impacted by market conditions affecting the travel and insurance industries, including natural disasters, health scares (such as severe acute respiratory syndrome, or SARS, and avian influenza, or bird flu) and terrorist attacks. In addition, some of our contracts do not commit our clients to providing us with a specific volume of business.

In addition, the long sales cycle for our services, which typically ranges from three to 12 months, and the internal budget and approval processes of our prospective clients makes it difficult to predict the timing of new client engagements. Revenue is recognized upon actual provision of services and when the criteria for recognition are achieved. Accordingly, the financial benefit of gaining a new client may be delayed due to delays in the implementation of our services. These factors may make it difficult for us to prepare accurate internal financial forecasts or replace anticipated revenue that we do not receive as a result of those delays. Due to the above factors, it is possible that in some future quarters our operating results may be significantly below the expectations of the public market, analysts and investors.

Our clients may terminate contracts before completion or choose not to renew contracts which could adversely affect our business and reduce our revenue.

The terms of our client contracts typically range from three to five years. Many of our client contracts can be terminated by our clients with or without cause, with three to six months’ notice and, in most cases, without penalty. The termination of a substantial percentage of these contracts could adversely affect our business and reduce our revenue. Contracts representing 10.2% of our revenue and 16.4% of our revenue less repair payments from our clients in fiscal 2007 will expire on or before March 31, 2008. Failure to meet contractual requirements could result in cancellation or non-renewal of a contract. Some of our contracts may be terminated by the client if certain of our key personnel working on the client project leave our employment and we are unable to find suitable replacements. In addition, a contract termination or significant reduction in work assigned to us by a major client could cause us to experience a higher than expected number of unassigned employees, which would increase our cost of revenue as a percentage of revenue until we are able to reduce or reallocate our headcount. We may not be able to replace any client that elects to terminate or not renew its contract with us, which would adversely affect our business and revenue.

Some of our client contracts contain provisions which, if triggered, could result in lower future revenue and have an adverse effect on our business.

If our clients agree to provide us with a specified volume and scale of business or to provide us with business for a specified minimum duration, we may, in return, agree to include certain provisions in our contracts with such clients which provide for downward revision of our prices under certain circumstances. For example, certain client contracts provide that if during the term of the contract, we were to offer similar services to any other client on terms and conditions more favorable than those provided in the contract, we would be obliged to offer equally favorable terms and conditions to the client. This may result in lower revenue and profits under these contracts. Certain other contracts allow a client in certain limited circumstances to request a benchmark study comparing our pricing and performance with that of an agreed list of other service providers for comparable services. Based on the results of the study and depending on the reasons for any unfavorable variance, we may be required to make improvements in the service we provide or to reduce the pricing for services to be performed under the remaining term of the contract.

Some of our client contracts provide that during the term of the contract and under specified circumstances, we may not provide similar services to their competitors. Some of our contracts also provide that, during the term of the contract and for a certain period thereafter ranging from six to 12 months, we may not provide similar services to certain or any of their competitors using the same personnel. These restrictions may hamper our ability to compete for and provide services to other clients in the same industry, which may result in lower future revenue and profitability.

Some of our contracts specify that if a change in control of our company occurs during the term of the contract, the client has the right to terminate the contract. These provisions may result in our contracts being terminated if there is such a change in control, resulting in a potential loss of revenue.

Some of our client contracts also contain provisions that would require us to pay penalties to our clients if we do not meet pre-agreed service level requirements. Failure to meet these requirements could result in the payment of significant penalties by us to our clients which in turn could have an adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition and cash flows.

We enter into long-term contracts with our clients, and our failure to estimate the resources and time required for our contracts may negatively affect our profitability.

The terms of our client contracts typically range from three to five years. In many of our contracts we commit to long-term pricing with our clients and therefore bear the risk of cost overruns, completion delays and wage inflation in connection with these contracts. If we fail to estimate accurately the resources and time required for a contract, future wage inflation rates or currency exchange rates, or if we fail to complete our contractual obligations within the contracted timeframe, our revenue and profitability may be negatively affected.

Our profitability will suffer if we are not able to maintain our pricing and asset utilization levels and control our costs.

Our profit margin, and therefore our profitability, is largely a function of our asset utilization and the rates we are able to recover for our services. One of the most significant components of our asset utilization is our seat utilization rate which is the average number of work shifts per day, out of a maximum of three, for which we are able to utilize our work stations, or seats. If we are not able to maintain the pricing for our services or an appropriate seat utilization rate, without corresponding cost reductions, our profitability will suffer. The rates we are able to recover for our services are affected by a number of factors, including our clients’ perceptions of our ability to add value through our services, competition, introduction of new services or products by us or our competitors, our ability to accurately estimate, attain and sustain engagement revenue, margins and cash flows over increasingly longer contract periods and general economic and political conditions.

Our profitability is also a function of our ability to control our costs and improve our efficiency. As we increase the number of our employees and execute our strategies for growth, we may not be able to manage the significantly larger and more geographically diverse workforce that may result, which could adversely affect our ability to control our costs or improve our efficiency.

We have incurred losses in the past and have a limited operating history. We may not be profitable in the future and may not be able to secure additional business.

We have incurred losses in each of the three fiscal years from fiscal 2003 through fiscal 2005. In future periods, we expect our selling, general and administrative, or SG&A, expenses to continue to increase. If our revenue does not grow at a faster rate than these expected increases in our expenses, or if our operating expenses are higher than we anticipate, we may not be profitable and we may incur additional losses.

In addition, the offshore business process outsourcing industry is a relatively new industry, and we have a limited operating history. We started our business by offering business process outsourcing services as part of British Airways in 1996. In fiscal 2003, we enhanced our focus on providing business process outsourcing services to third parties. As such, we have only focused on servicing third-party clients for a limited time. We may not be able to secure additional business or retain current business with third-parties or add third-party clients in the future.

If we cause disruptions to our clients’ businesses or provide inadequate service, our clients may have claims for substantial damages against us. Our insurance coverage may be inadequate to cover these claims, and as a result, our profits may be substantially reduced.

Most of our contracts with clients contain service level and performance requirements, including requirements relating to the quality of our services and the timing and quality of responses to the client’s customer inquiries. In some cases, the quality of services that we provide is measured by quality assurance ratings and surveys which are based in part on the results of direct monitoring by our clients of interactions between our employees and our client’s customers. Failure to consistently meet service

requirements of a client or errors made by our associates in the course of delivering services to our clients could disrupt the client’s business and result in a reduction in revenue or a claim for substantial damages against us. For example, some of our agreements stipulate standards of service that, if not met by us, will result in lower payment to us. In addition, a failure or inability to meet a contractual requirement could seriously damage our reputation and affect our ability to attract new business.

Our dependence on our offshore delivery centers requires us to maintain active data and voice communications between our main delivery centers in India, Sri Lanka and the UK, our international technology hubs in the US and the UK and our clients’ offices. Although we maintain redundant facilities and communications links, disruptions could result from, among other things, technical and electricity breakdowns, computer glitches and viruses and adverse weather conditions. Any significant failure of our equipment or systems, or any major disruption to basic infrastructure like power and telecommunications in the locations in which we operate, could impede our ability to provide services to our clients, have a negative impact on our reputation, cause us to lose clients, reduce our revenue and harm our business.

Under our contracts with our clients, our liability for breach of our obligations is generally limited to actual damages suffered by the client and capped at a portion of the fees paid or payable to us under the relevant contract. To the extent that our contracts contain limitations on liability, such limitations may be unenforceable or otherwise may not protect us from liability for damages. In addition, certain liabilities, such as claims of third parties for which we may be required to indemnify our clients, are generally not limited under those agreements. Although we have commercial general liability insurance coverage, the coverage may not continue to be available on reasonable terms or in sufficient amounts to cover one or more large claims, and our insurers may disclaim coverage as to any future claims. The successful assertion of one or more large claims against us that exceed available insurance coverage, or changes in our insurance policies (including premium increases or the imposition of large deductible or co-insurance requirements), could have a material adverse effect on our business, reputation, results of operations, financial condition and cash flows.

We are liable to our clients for damages caused by unauthorized disclosure of sensitive and confidential information, whether through a breach of our computer systems, through our employees or otherwise.

We are typically required to manage, utilize and store sensitive or confidential client data in connection with the services we provide. Under the terms of our client contracts, we are required to keep such information strictly confidential. Our client contracts do not include any limitation on our liability to them with respect to breaches of our obligation to maintain confidentiality on the information we receive from them. We seek to implement measures to protect sensitive and confidential client data and have not experienced any material breach of confidentiality to date. However, if any person, including any of our employees, penetrates our network security or otherwise mismanages or misappropriates sensitive or confidential client data, we could be subject to significant liability and lawsuits from our clients or their customers for breaching contractual confidentiality provisions or privacy laws. Although we have insurance coverage for mismanagement or misappropriation of such information by our employees, that coverage may not continue to be available on reasonable terms or in sufficient amounts to cover one or more large claims against us and our insurers may disclaim coverage as to any future claims. Penetration of the network security of our data centers could have a negative impact on our reputation which would harm our business.

Failure to adhere to the regulations that govern our business could result in our being unable to effectively perform our services. Failure to adhere to regulations that govern our clients’ businesses could result in breaches of contract with our clients.

Our clients’ business operations are subject to certain rules and regulations such as the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act and the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act in the US and the Financial Services Act in the UK. Our clients may contractually require that we perform our services in a manner that would enable them to comply with such rules and regulations. Failure to perform our services in such a manner could result in breaches of contract with our clients and, in some limited circumstances, civil fines and criminal penalties for us. In addition, we are required under various Indian laws to obtain and maintain permits and licenses for the conduct of our business. If we do not maintain our licenses or other qualifications to provide our services, we may not be able to provide services to existing clients or be able to attract new clients and could lose revenue, which could have a material adverse effect on our business.

The international nature of our business exposes us to several risks, such as significant currency fluctuations and unexpected changes in the regulatory requirements of multiple jurisdictions.

We have operations in India, Sri Lanka and the UK and we service clients across Europe, North America and Asia. Our corporate structure also spans multiple jurisdictions, with our parent holding company incorporated in Jersey, Channel Islands, and intermediate and operating subsidiaries incorporated in India, Sri Lanka, Mauritius, the US and the UK, with operations expected to commence in Romania soon. As a result, we are exposed to risks typically associated with conducting business internationally, many of which are beyond our control. These risks include:

•		significant currency fluctuations between the US dollar and the pound sterling (in which our revenue is principally denominated) and the Indian rupee (in which a significant portion of our costs are denominated);
•		legal uncertainty owing to the overlap of different legal regimes, and problems in asserting contractual or other rights across international borders;
•		potentially adverse tax consequences, such as scrutiny of transfer pricing arrangements by authorities in the countries in which we operate;
•		potential tariffs and other trade barriers;
•		unexpected changes in regulatory requirements;
•		the burden and expense of complying with the laws and regulations of various jurisdictions; and
•		terrorist attacks and other acts of violence or war.

The occurrence of any of these events could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and financial condition.

We may not succeed in identifying suitable acquisition targets or integrating any acquired business into our operations, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition and cash flows.

Our growth strategy involves gaining new clients and expanding our service offerings, both organically and through strategic acquisitions. Historically, we have expanded some of our service offerings and gained new clients through strategic acquisitions. For example, we completed our acquisition of Trinity Partners Inc., or Trinity Partners, in November 2005, and we acquired Marketics Technologies (India) Private Limited, or Marketics, in May 2007, and Flovate Technologies Limited, or Flovate, in June 2007. It is possible that in the future we may not succeed in identifying suitable acquisition targets available for sale on reasonable terms, have access to the capital required to finance potential acquisitions or be able to consummate any acquisition. The inability to identify suitable acquisition targets or investments or the inability to complete such transactions may affect our competitiveness and our growth prospects. In addition, our management may not be able to successfully integrate any acquired business into our operations and any acquisition we do complete may not result in long-term benefits to us. For example, if we acquire a company, we could experience difficulties in assimilating that company’s personnel, operations, technology and software. In addition, the key personnel of the acquired company may decide not to work for us. The lack of profitability of any of our acquisitions could have a material adverse effect on our operating results. Future acquisitions may also result in the incurrence of indebtedness or the issuance of additional equity securities and may present difficulties in financing the acquisition on attractive terms. Acquisitions also typically involve a number of other risks, including diversion of management’s attention, legal liabilities and the need to amortize acquired intangible assets, any of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition and cash flows.

Our facilities are at risk of damage by natural disasters.

Our operational facilities and communication hubs may be damaged in natural disasters such as earthquakes, floods, heavy rains, tsunamis and cyclones. For example, during the floods in Mumbai in July 2005, our operations were adversely affected as a result of the disruption of the city’s public utility and transport services making it difficult for our associates to commute to our office. Such natural disasters may lead to disruption to information systems and telephone service for sustained periods. Damage or destruction that interrupts our provision of outsourcing services could damage our relationships with our clients and may cause us to incur substantial additional expenses to repair or replace damaged equipment or facilities. We may also be liable to our clients for disruption in service resulting from such damage or destruction. While we currently have commercial liability insurance, our insurance coverage may not be sufficient. Furthermore, we may be unable to secure such insurance coverage at premiums

acceptable to us in the future or secure such insurance coverage at all. Prolonged disruption of our services as a result of natural disasters would also entitle our clients to terminate their contracts with us.

Our business may not develop in ways that we currently anticipate due to negative public reaction to offshore outsourcing, proposed legislation or otherwise.

We have based our strategy of future growth on certain assumptions regarding our industry, services and future demand in the market for such services. However, the trend to outsource business processes may not continue and could reverse. Offshore outsourcing is a politically sensitive topic in the UK, the US and elsewhere. For example, many organizations and public figures in the UK and the US have publicly expressed concern about a perceived association between offshore outsourcing providers and the loss of jobs in their home countries.

In addition, there has been publicity about the negative experiences, such as theft and misappropriation of sensitive client data, of various companies that use offshore outsourcing, particularly in India. Current or prospective clients may elect to perform such services themselves or may be discouraged from transferring these services from onshore to offshore providers to avoid negative perceptions that may be associated with using an offshore provider. Any slowdown or reversal of existing industry trends towards offshore outsourcing would seriously harm our ability to compete effectively with competitors that operate out of facilities located in the UK or the US.

A variety of US federal and state legislation has been proposed that, if enacted, could restrict or discourage US companies from outsourcing their services to companies outside the US. For example, legislation has been proposed that would require offshore providers of services requiring direct interaction with clients’ customers to identify to clients’ customers where the offshore provider is located. Because some of our clients are located in the US, any expansion of existing laws or the enactment of new legislation restricting offshore outsourcing could adversely impact our ability to do business with US clients and have a material and adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition and cash flows. In addition, it is possible that legislation could be adopted that would restrict US private sector companies that have federal or state government contracts from outsourcing their services to offshore service providers. This would affect our ability to attract or retain clients that have such contracts.

Recent legislation introduced in the UK provides that if a company transfers or outsources its business or a part of its business to a transferee or a service provider, the employees who were employed in such business are entitled to become employed by the transferee or service provider on the same terms and conditions as they had been employed before. The dismissal of such employees as a result of such transfer of business is deemed unfair dismissal and entitles the employee to compensation. As a result, we may become liable for redundancy payments to the employees of our clients in the UK who outsource business to us. We believe this legislation will not affect our existing contracts with clients in the UK. However, we may be liable under any service level agreements we may enter into in the future pursuant to existing master services agreements with our UK clients. In addition, this legislation may have an adverse effect on potential business from clients in the UK.

We face competition from onshore and offshore business process outsourcing companies and from information technology companies that also offer business process outsourcing services. Our clients may also choose to run their business processes themselves, either in their home countries or through captive units located offshore.

The market for outsourcing services is very competitive and we expect competition to intensify and increase from a number of sources. We believe that the principal competitive factors in our markets are price, service quality, sales and marketing skills, and industry expertise. We face significant competition from our clients’ own in-house groups including, in some cases, in-house departments operating offshore or captive units. Clients who currently outsource a significant proportion of their business processes or information technology services to vendors in India may, for various reasons, including to diversify geographic risk, seek to reduce their dependence on any one country. We also face competition from onshore and offshore business process outsourcing and information technology services companies. In addition, the trend toward offshore outsourcing, international expansion by foreign and domestic competitors and continuing technological changes will result in new and different competitors entering our markets. These competitors may include entrants from the communications, software and data networking industries or entrants in geographic locations with lower costs than those in which we operate.

Some of these existing and future competitors have greater financial, human and other resources, longer operating histories, greater technological expertise, more recognizable brand names and more established relationships in the industries that we currently serve or may serve in the future. In addition, some of our competitors may enter into strategic or commercial

relationships among themselves or with larger, more established companies in order to increase their ability to address client needs, or enter into similar arrangements with potential clients. Increased competition, our inability to compete successfully against competitors, pricing pressures or loss of market share could result in reduced operating margins which could harm our business, results of operations, financial condition and cash flows.

Our failure to timely comply with Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 could have a material adverse effect on our share price.

Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 requires management’s annual review and evaluation of our internal controls over financial reporting, and an attestation of the effectiveness of these controls by our independent registered public accountants beginning with our fiscal year ending on March 31, 2008. We are in the process of evaluating and testing our internal financial reporting controls in anticipation of our compliance with Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and have not yet completed this process. We have formed internal evaluation committees and engaged consultants to assist us in such compliance. If we do not implement the requirements of Section 404 in a timely manner or with adequate compliance, we might be subject to sanctions or investigation by regulatory authorities, such as the Securities and Exchange Commission, or the Commission. Any such action could harm our business or investors’ confidence in our company and could cause our share price to fall.

Our controlling shareholder, Warburg Pincus, is able to control or significantly influence our corporate actions.

Warburg Pincus beneficially owns more than 50% of our shares. As a result of its ownership position, Warburg Pincus has the ability to control or significantly influence matters requiring shareholder and board approval including, without limitation, the election of directors, significant corporate transactions such as amalgamations and consolidations, changes in control of our company and sales of all or substantially all of our assets. These actions may be taken even if they are opposed by the other shareholders.

We have certain anti-takeover provisions in our articles of association that may discourage a change in control.

Our articles of association contain anti-takeover provisions that could make it more difficult for a third party to acquire us without the consent of our board of directors. These provisions include:

•		a classified board of directors with staggered three-year terms; and
•		the ability of our board of directors to determine the rights, preferences and privileges of our preferred shares and to issue the preferred shares without shareholder approval, which could be exercised by our board of directors to increase the number of outstanding shares and prevent or delay a takeover attempt.

These provisions could make it more difficult for a third party to acquire us, even if the third party’s offer may be considered beneficial by many shareholders. As a result, shareholders may be limited in their ability to obtain a premium for their shares.

It may be difficult for you to effect service of process and enforce legal judgments against us or our affiliates.

We are incorporated in Jersey, Channel Islands, and our primary operating subsidiary, WNS Global Services (Private) Limited, or WNS Global, is incorporated in India. A majority of our directors and senior executives are not residents of the US and virtually all of our assets and the assets of those persons are located outside the US. As a result, it may not be possible for you to effect service of process within the US upon those persons or us. In addition, you may be unable to enforce judgments obtained in courts of the US against those persons outside the jurisdiction of their residence, including judgments predicated solely upon the securities laws of the US.

Risks Related to India

A substantial portion of our assets and operations are located in India and we are subject to regulatory, economic, social and political uncertainties in India.

Our primary operating subsidiary, WNS Global, is incorporated in India, and a substantial portion of our assets and employees are located in India. We intend to continue to develop and expand our facilities in India. The government of India, however, has

exercised and continues to exercise significant influence over many aspects of the Indian economy. The government of India has provided significant tax incentives and relaxed certain regulatory restrictions in order to encourage foreign investment in specified sectors of the economy, including the business process outsourcing industry. Those programs that have benefited us include tax holidays, liberalized import and export duties and preferential rules on foreign investment and repatriation. We cannot assure you that such liberalization policies will continue. Various factors, including a collapse of the present coalition government due to the withdrawal of support of coalition members, could trigger significant changes in India’s economic liberalization and deregulation policies and disrupt business and economic conditions in India generally and our business in particular. The government of India may decide to introduce the reservation policy. According to this policy, all companies operating in the private sector in India, including our subsidiaries in India, would be required to reserve a certain percentage of jobs for the economically underprivileged population in the relevant state where such companies are incorporated. If this policy is introduced, our ability to hire employees of our choice may be restricted. Our financial performance and the market price of our ADSs may be adversely affected by changes in inflation, exchange rates and controls, interest rates, government of India policies (including taxation policies), social stability or other political, economic or diplomatic developments affecting India in the future.

India has witnessed communal clashes in the past. Although such clashes in India have, in the recent past, been sporadic and have been contained within reasonably short periods of time, any such civil disturbance in the future could result in disruptions in transportation or communication networks, as well as have adverse implications for general economic conditions in India. Such events could have a material adverse effect on our business, on the value of our ADSs and on your investment in our ADSs.

If the government of India reduces or withdraws tax benefits and other incentives it currently provides to companies within our industry or if the same are not available for any other reason, our financial condition could be negatively affected.

Under the Indian Finance Act, 2000, except for one delivery center located in Mumbai, all our delivery centers in India benefit from a ten-year holiday from Indian corporate income taxes. As a result, our service operations, including any businesses we acquire, have been subject to relatively low Indian tax liabilities. We incurred minimal income tax expense on our Indian operations in fiscal 2007 as a result of the tax holiday, compared to approximately $8.7 million that we would have incurred if the tax holiday had not been available for that period.

The Indian Finance Act, 2000, phases out the tax holiday over a ten-year period from fiscal 2000 through fiscal 2009. The tax holiday enjoyed by our delivery centers in India expires in stages, on April 1, 2008 for one of our delivery centers located in Nashik, and on April 1, 2009 for our delivery centers located in Mumbai, Pune, Nashik and Gurgaon. When our Indian tax holiday expires or terminates, or if the government of India withdraws or reduces the benefits of the Indian tax holiday, our Indian tax expense will materially increase and this increase will have a material impact on our results of operations. In the absence of a tax holiday, income derived from India would be taxed up to a maximum of the then existing annual tax rate which, as of March 31, 2007, was 33.66%.

In May 2007, the Indian Finance Act, 2007 was adopted, with the effect of subjecting Indian companies that benefit from a holiday from Indian corporate income taxes to the minimum alternate tax, or MAT, at the rate of 11.33% in the case of profits exceeding Rs. 10 million and 10.3% in the case of profits not exceeding Rs. 10 million with effect from April 1, 2007. As a result of this amendment to the tax regulations, we will be subject to MAT and be required to pay additional taxes commencing fiscal 2008. To the extent MAT paid exceeds the actual tax payable on our taxable income, we would be able to set off such MAT credits against tax payable in the succeeding seven years, subject to the satisfaction of certain conditions.

In addition, in May 2007, the government of India implemented a fringe benefit tax on the allotment of shares pursuant to the exercise or vesting, on or after April 1, 2007, of options and restricted share units, or RSUs, granted to employees. The fringe benefit tax is payable by the employer at the rate of 33.99% on the difference between the fair market value of the options and RSUs on the date of vesting of the options and RSUs and the exercise price of the options and the purchase price (if any) for the RSUs, as applicable. The government of India has not published its guidelines on how the fair market value of the options and RSUs should be determined. The new legislation permits the employer to recover the fringe benefit tax from the employees. However, we may decide in the future not to recover, or we may be unsuccessful in recovering, the fringe benefit tax from our employees, which may cause our overall expense to increase, possibly materially, and impact our cash flows.

In 2005, the government of India implemented the Special Economic Zones Act, 2005, or the SEZ legislation, with the effect that taxable income of new operations established in designated special economic zones, or SEZs, may be eligible for a 15-year tax holiday scheme consisting of a complete tax holiday for the initial five years and a partial tax holiday for the subsequent 10 years, subject to the satisfaction of certain conditions. However, the Ministry of Finance in India has expressed concern about the potential loss of tax revenues as a result of the exemptions under the SEZ legislation. The SEZ legislation has been criticized on economic grounds by the International Monetary Fund and the SEZ legislation may be challenged by certain non-governmental organizations. It is possible that, as a

result of such political pressures, the procedure for obtaining the benefits of the SEZ legislation may become more onerous, the types of land eligible for SEZ status may be further restricted or the SEZ legislation may be amended or repealed. Moreover, there is continuing uncertainty as to the governmental and regulatory approvals required to establish operations in the SEZs or to qualify for the tax benefit. This uncertainty may delay our establishment of operations in the SEZs.

US and Indian transfer pricing regulations require that any international transaction involving associated enterprises be at an arm’s-length price. We consider the transactions among our subsidiaries and us to be on arm’s-length pricing terms. If, however, the applicable income tax authorities review any of our tax returns and determine that the transfer prices we have applied are not appropriate, we may incur increased tax liability, including accrued interest and penalties, which would cause our tax expense to increase, possibly materially, thereby reducing our profitability and cash flows.

Terrorist attacks and other acts of violence involving India or its neighboring countries could adversely affect our operations, resulting in a loss of client confidence and adversely affecting our business, results of operations, financial condition and cash flows.

Terrorist attacks and other acts of violence or war involving India or its neighboring countries, may adversely affect worldwide financial markets and could potentially lead to economic recession, which could adversely affect our business, results of operations, financial condition and cash flows. South Asia has, from time to time, experienced instances of civil unrest and hostilities among neighboring countries, including India and Pakistan. In recent years, military confrontations between India and Pakistan have occurred in the region of Kashmir and along the India/Pakistan border. There have also been incidents in and near India such as a terrorist attack on the Indian Parliament, troop mobilizations along the India/Pakistan border and an aggravated geopolitical situation in the region. Such military activity or terrorist attacks in the future could influence the Indian economy by disrupting communications and making travel more difficult. Resulting political tensions could create a greater perception that investments in Indian companies involve a high degree of risk. Such political tensions could similarly create a perception that there is a risk of disruption of services provided by India-based companies, which could have a material adverse effect on the market for our services.

Furthermore, if India were to become engaged in armed hostilities, particularly hostilities that were protracted or involved the threat or use of nuclear weapons, we might not be able to continue our operations.

Restrictions on entry visas may affect our ability to compete for and provide services to clients in the US, which could have a material adverse effect on future revenue.

The vast majority of our employees are Indian nationals. The ability of some of our executives to work with and meet our European and North American clients and our clients from other countries depends on the ability of our senior managers and employees to obtain the necessary visas and entry permits. In response to recent terrorist attacks and global unrest, US and European immigration authorities have increased the level of scrutiny in granting visas. Immigration laws in those countries may also require us to meet certain other legal requirements as a condition to obtaining or maintaining entry visas. These restrictions have significantly lengthened the time requirements to obtain visas for our personnel, which has in the past resulted, and may continue to result, in delays in the ability of our personnel to meet with our clients. In addition, immigration laws are subject to legislative change and varying standards of application and enforcement due to political forces, economic conditions or other events, including terrorist attacks. We cannot predict the political or economic events that could affect immigration laws, or any restrictive impact those events could have on obtaining or monitoring entry visas for our personnel. If we are unable to obtain the necessary visas for personnel who need to visit our clients’ sites, or if such visas are delayed, we may not be able to provide services to our clients or to continue to provide services on a timely basis, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition and cash flows.

Currency fluctuations among the Indian rupee, the pound sterling and the US dollar could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations.

Although substantially all of our revenue is denominated in pound sterling or US dollars, a significant portion of our expenses (other than payments to repair centers, which are primarily denominated in pound sterling) are incurred and paid in Indian rupees. We report our financial results in US dollars and our results of operations would be adversely affected if the Indian rupee appreciates against the US dollar or the pound sterling depreciates against the US dollar. The exchange rates between the Indian rupee and the US dollar and between the pound sterling and the US dollar have changed substantially in recent years and may fluctuate substantially in the future.

The average Indian rupee/US dollar exchange rate was approximately Rs. 45.12 per $1.00 (based on the noon buying rate) in fiscal 2007, which represented a depreciation of the Indian rupee of 2.17% as compared with the average exchange rate of approximately Rs. 44.17 per $1.00 (based on the noon buying rate) in fiscal 2006, which in turn represented an appreciation of the Indian rupee of 1.55% as compared with the average exchange rate of approximately Rs. 44.86 per $1.00 (based on the noon buying rate) in fiscal 2005. The average pound sterling/US dollar exchange rate was approximately £0.53 per $1.00 (based on the noon buying rate) in fiscal 2007, which represented an appreciation of the pound sterling of 5.63% as compared with the average exchange rate of approximately £0.56 per $1.00 (based on the noon buying rate) in fiscal 2006, which in turn represented a depreciation of the pound sterling of 3.35% as compared with the average exchange rate of approximately £0.54 per $1.00 (based on the noon buying rate) in fiscal 2005. Our results of operations may be adversely affected if the Indian rupee appreciates significantly against the pound sterling or the US dollar or if the pound sterling depreciates against the US dollar. We hedge a portion of our foreign currency exposures using options and forward contracts. We cannot assure you that our hedging strategy will be successful or will mitigate our exposure to currency risk.

If more stringent labor laws become applicable to us, our profitability may be adversely affected.

India has stringent labor legislation that protects the interests of workers, including legislation that sets forth detailed procedures for dispute resolution and employee removal and legislation that imposes financial obligations on employers upon retrenchment. Though we are exempt from a number of these labor laws at present, there can be no assurance that such laws will not become applicable to the business process outsourcing industry in India in the future. In addition, our employees may in the future form unions. If these labor laws become applicable to our workers or if our employees unionize, it may become difficult for us to maintain flexible human resource policies, discharge employees or downsize, and our profitability may be adversely affected.

An outbreak of an infectious disease or any other serious public health concerns in Asia or elsewhere could cause our business to suffer.

The outbreak of an infectious disease in Asia or elsewhere could have a negative impact on the economies, financial markets and business activities in the countries in which our end markets are located and could thereby have a material adverse effect on our business. The outbreak of SARS in 2003 in Asia and the outbreak of the avian influenza, or bird flu, across Asia and Europe, including the recent outbreak in India, have adversely affected a number of countries and companies. Although we have not been adversely impacted by these recent outbreaks, we can give no assurance that a future outbreak of an infectious disease among humans or animals will not have a material adverse effect on our business.

Risks Related to our ADSs

Substantial future sales of our shares or ADSs in the public market could cause our ADS price to fall.

Sales by us or our shareholders of a substantial number of our ADSs in the public market, or the perception that these sales could occur, could cause the market price of our ADSs to decline. These sales, or the perception that these sales could occur, also might make it more difficult for us to sell securities in the future at a time or at a price that we deem appropriate or pay for acquisitions using our equity securities. As of May 31, 2007, we had 41,895,246 ordinary shares outstanding, including 18,703,765 shares represented by 18,703,765 ADSs. In addition, as of May 31, 2007, there were options and RSUs outstanding under our 2002 Stock Incentive Plan and our 2006 Incentive Award Plan to purchase a total of 3,200,130 ordinary shares or ADSs. All ADSs are freely transferable, except that ADSs owned by our affiliates, including Warburg Pincus, may only be sold in the US if they are registered or qualify for an exemption from registration, including pursuant to Rule 144 under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Securities Act. The remaining ordinary shares outstanding may be sold in the United States if they are registered or qualify for an exemption from registration, including pursuant to Rule 144 under the Securities Act.

The market price for our ADSs may be volatile.

The market price for our ADSs is likely to be highly volatile and subject to wide fluctuations in response to factors including the following:

•		announcements of technological developments;
•		regulatory developments in our target markets affecting us, our clients or our competitors;

•		actual or anticipated fluctuations in our quarterly operating results;
•		changes in financial estimates by securities research analysts;
•		changes in the economic performance or market valuations of other companies engaged in business process outsourcing;
•		addition or loss of executive officers or key employees;
•		sales or expected sales of additional shares or ADSs; and
•		loss of one or more significant clients.

In addition, securities markets generally and from time to time experience significant price and volume fluctuations that are not related to the operating performance of particular companies. These market fluctuations may also have a material adverse effect on the market price of our ADSs.

Holders of ADSs may be restricted in their ability to exercise voting rights.

At our request, the depositary of the ADSs will mail to you any notice of shareholders’ meeting received from us together with information explaining how to instruct the depositary to exercise the voting rights of the ordinary shares represented by ADSs. If the depositary timely receives voting instructions from you, it will endeavor to vote the ordinary shares represented by your ADSs in accordance with such voting instructions. However, the ability of the depositary to carry out voting instructions may be limited by practical and legal limitations and the terms of the ordinary shares on deposit. We cannot assure you that you will receive voting materials in time to enable you to return voting instructions to the depositary in a timely manner. Ordinary shares for which no voting instructions have been received will not be voted.

As a foreign private issuer, we are not subject to the Commission’s proxy rules which regulate the form and content of solicitations by US-based issuers of proxies from their shareholders. The form of notice and proxy statement that we have been using does not include all of the information that would be provided under the Commission’s proxy rules.

We may be classified as a passive foreign investment company for our taxable year ended March 31, 2007, which could result in adverse United States federal income tax consequences to US Holders.

The application of the “passive foreign investment company,” or PFIC, rules to us in respect of our taxable year ended March 31, 2007 is uncertain. A non-US corporation will be considered a PFIC for any taxable year if either (1) under the PFIC income test, at least 75% of its gross income is passive income or (2) under the PFIC asset test, at least 50% of its assets (determined on the basis of a quarterly average) is attributable to assets that produce or are held for the production of passive income for such taxable year. However, the application of the PFIC asset test to a corporation that is a “controlled foreign corporation,” or a CFC (as defined under the United States federal income tax law), for its taxable year in which it becomes a publicly traded corporation after its first quarter is not clear. Because we were a CFC for our taxable year ended on March 31, 2007, the application of the PFIC asset test to us for our taxable year ended March 31, 2007 is uncertain.

Under the least favorable interpretation of the PFIC asset test, there is risk that we may be treated as a PFIC in respect of our taxable year ended March 31, 2007. Under more favorable interpretations of the PFIC assets test, we believe that we would not be treated as a PFIC for our taxable year ended March 31, 2007. It may be reasonable for US Holders (as defined under “Item 10. Additional Information — E. Taxation — US Federal Income Taxation”) to apply a more favorable interpretation of this test for purposes of determining and reporting the US federal income tax consequences of their investment in the ADSs or ordinary shares, although these holders should consult their own tax advisers regarding the reasonableness of this position. US Holders also should note that the United States Internal Revenue Service, or IRS, could seek to apply the least favorable interpretation.

If we are treated as a PFIC for any taxable year during which a US Holder owns an ADS or an ordinary share, adverse US federal income tax consequences could apply to that holder. See “Item 10. Additional Information — E. Taxation — US Federal Income Taxation — Passive Foreign Investment Company.” US Holders are urged to consult their own tax advisors regarding the potential application of the PFIC rules to their ownership of ADSs or ordinary shares and the availability and advisability of any elections.

ITEM 4. INFORMATION ON THE COMPANY

A. History and Development of our Company

WNS (Holdings) Limited was incorporated as a private liability company on February 18, 2002 under the laws of Jersey, Channel Islands, and maintains a registered office in Jersey at Channel House, 7 Esplanade, St Helier, Jersey, Channel Islands . We converted from a private limited company to a public limited company on January 4, 2006 when we acquired more than 30 shareholders as calculated in accordance with Article 17A of the Companies (Jersey) Law, 1991, or the 1991 Law. We gave notice of this to the Jersey Financial Services Commission in accordance with Article 17(3) of the 1991 Law on January 12, 2006. Our principal executive office is located at Gate 4, Godrej & Boyce Complex, Pirojshanagar, Vikhroli (W), Mumbai 400 079, India, and the telephone number for this office is (91-22) 4095-2100. Our website address is www.wnsgs.com. Information contained on our website does not constitute part of this annual report. Our agent for service in the US is our subsidiary, WNS North America Inc., 420 Lexington Avenue, Suite 2515, New York, New York 10170.

We began operations as an in-house unit of British Airways in 1996, and started focusing on providing business process outsourcing services to third parties in fiscal 2003. Warburg Pincus acquired a controlling stake in our company from British Airways in May 2002 and inducted a new senior management team. In fiscal 2003, we acquired Town & Country Assistance Limited (which we subsequently rebranded as WNS Assistance and which constitutes our reportable segment for financial statement purposes, called WNS Auto Claims BPO), a UK-based automobile claims handling company, thereby extending our service portfolio beyond the travel industry to include insurance-based automobile claims processing. In fiscal 2004, we acquired the health claims management business of Greensnow Inc. In fiscal 2006, we acquired Trinity Partners (which we merged into our subsidiary, WNS North America Inc.), a provider of business process outsourcing services to financial institutions, focusing on mortgage banking. In August 2006, we acquired from PRG Airline Services Limited its fare audit services business. In May 2007, we acquired Marketics, a provider of offshore analytics services. In June 2007, we acquired Flovate, a company engaged in the development and maintenance of software products and solutions.

We are headquartered in Mumbai, India and we have client service offices in New York (US) and London (UK) and delivery centers in Ipswich (UK), Tucson (US), India and Sri Lanka. We completed our initial public offering in July 2006 and our ADSs are listed on the New York Stock Exchange, or the NYSE, under the symbol “WNS.”

Our capital expenditures in fiscal 2007, 2006 and 2005 amounted to $27.5 million, $14.9 million and $18.3 million, respectively. Our principal capital expenditures were incurred for the purposes of setting up new delivery centers or expanding existing delivery centers and setting up related technology to enable offshore execution and management of clients’ business processes. We expect our capital expenditure needs in fiscal 2008 to be approximately $36 million, a significant amount of which we expect to expend on building new facilities in India. We expect to meet these estimated capital expenditures from cash generated from operating activities and existing cash and cash equivalents (including the remaining proceeds to us from our initial public offering).

B. Business Overview

We are a leading provider of offshore business process outsourcing, or BPO, services. We provide comprehensive data, voice and analytical services that are underpinned by our expertise in our target industry sectors. We transfer the business processes of our clients, which are typically companies located in Europe and North America, to our delivery centers located primarily in India. We provide high quality execution of client processes, monitor these processes against multiple performance metrics, and seek to improve them on an ongoing basis.

We began operations as an in-house unit of British Airways in 1996, and started focusing on providing business process outsourcing services to third parties in fiscal 2003. According to the National Association of Software and Service Companies, or NASSCOM, an industry association in India, we were among the top two India-based offshore business process outsourcing companies in terms of revenue in 2004, 2005 and 2006. As of March 31, 2007, we had 15,084 employees executing over 400 distinct business processes on behalf of over 150 significant clients. Our largest clients in terms of revenue contribution include leading global corporations such as Air Canada, AVIVA, British Airways, Centrica, First Magnus Financial Corporation, GfK, Marsh, SITA, Travelocity and Virgin Atlantic Airways. See “— Clients.”

We design, implement and operate comprehensive business processes for our clients, involving data, voice and analytical components. Our services include industry-specific processes that are tailored to address our clients’ business and industry

practices, particularly in the travel and banking, financial services and insurance, or BFSI, industries. We also offer services applicable across multiple industries, in areas such as finance and accounting, human resources and supply chain management, which we collectively refer to as enterprise services, and in the areas of market, business and financial research and analytics, which we refer to as knowledge services. Our comprehensive service portfolio allows us to penetrate our clients and the industries we serve.

We generate revenue primarily from providing business process outsourcing services. A portion of our revenue includes payments which we make to automobile repair centers. We evaluate our business performance based on revenue net of these payments, since we believe that revenue less repair payments reflects more accurately the value of the business process outsourcing services we directly provide to our clients. For fiscal 2007, our revenue was $352.3 million, our revenue less repair payments was $219.7 million and our net income was $26.6 million.

Between fiscal 2005 and fiscal 2007, our revenue grew at a compound annual growth rate of 47.4% and our revenue less repair payments grew at a compound annual growth rate of 49.0%, faster than the projected 38.9% compound annual growth rate of the overall Indian offshore business process outsourcing industry for the comparable period as estimated by the NASSCOM Strategic Review, 2007. During this period, we grew both organically and through acquisitions. We believe we have achieved rapid growth and industry leadership through our understanding of the industries in which our clients operate, our focus on operational excellence, and a senior management team with significant experience in the global outsourcing industry. Our revenue is characterized by client, industry, geographic and service diversity, which we believe offers us a sustainable business model.

Industry Overview

Businesses globally are outsourcing a growing proportion of their business processes to streamline their organizations, focus on core operations, create flexibility, benefit from best-in-class process execution and thereby increase shareholder returns. More significantly, many of these businesses are outsourcing to offshore locations such as India to access a high quality and cost-effective workforce. We are a pioneer in the offshore business process outsourcing industry and are well positioned to benefit from the combination of the outsourcing and offshoring trends.

The global business process outsourcing industry is large and growing rapidly. According to International Data Corporation, or IDC, the global business process outsourcing market was $422.0 billion in 2005 and is projected to grow at a 10.9% compound annual growth rate from 2004 through 2009 to $641.0 billion. In comparison, IDC forecasts the information technology services market (excluding business process outsourcing) to grow at a compound annual growth rate of 6.0% over this same period, from $417.0 billion to $553.0 billion.

The offshore business process outsourcing industry is growing at a significantly faster rate than the overall global business process outsourcing industry. A joint report, or the NASSCOM-McKinsey report, published by NASSCOM and McKinsey & Company, in December 2005, estimates that the offshore business process outsourcing market will grow at a 37.0% compound annual growth rate, from $11.4 billion in revenue in fiscal 2005 to $55.0 billion in revenue in fiscal 2010. The same report estimates that the total value of business processes that could have been provided by offshore business process outsourcing providers in fiscal 2006 represents an addressable market of approximately $120.0 billion to $150.0 billion. Accordingly, we believe that offshore business process outsourcing has significant growth potential because we believe it constitutes less than 10.0% of the current addressable market described above. NASSCOM has identified retail banking, insurance, travel and hospitality and automobile manufacturing as the industries with the greatest potential for offshore outsourcing. We provide industry-focused business process outsourcing services to the majority of these industries.

The following charts set forth the relative growth rate and size of the global business process outsourcing industry and the global information technology industry, in addition to the expected growth rate of the Indian offshore business process outsourcing industry:

We believe that India is widely considered to be the most attractive destination for offshore business process outsourcing. According to the NASSCOM-McKinsey report, India-based players account for 45.0% of offshore business process outsourcing revenue in fiscal 2006, and India will retain its position as the most favored offshore business process outsourcing destination for the foreseeable future. The key factors for India’s predominance include its large, growing and highly educated English-speaking workforce coupled with a business and regulatory environment that is conducive to the growth of the business process outsourcing industry.

While a limited number of global corporations such as General Electric, British Airways (through our subsidiary, WNS Global) and American Express set up in-house business process outsourcing facilities in India in the mid-1990s, offshore business process outsourcing growth only accelerated significantly from 2000 onwards with the emergence of third party providers. This has been followed by a shift in focus from largely call center related outsourcing in areas such as tele-marketing and client service to a wider range of business processes such as finance and accounting, insurance claims administration and market research analysis. This shift in focus has given rise to an India-based offshore industry capable of providing a wide range of complex services.

Offshore business process outsourcing is typically a long-term strategic commitment for companies. The processes that companies outsource are frequently complex and integrated with their core operations. These processes require a high degree of customization and, often, a multi-stage offshore transfer program. Clients would therefore incur high switching costs to transfer these processes back to their home locations or to other business process outsourcing providers. As a result, once an offshore business process outsourcing provider gains the confidence of a client, the resulting business relationship is usually characterized by multi-year contracts with predictable annual revenue.

Given the long-term, strategic nature of these engagements, companies undertake a highly rigorous process in evaluating their offshore business process outsourcing provider. We believe a client typically seeks the following key attributes in a potential offshore business process outsourcing provider:

•		established reputation and industry leadership;
•		demonstrated ability to execute a diverse range of mission-critical and often complex business processes;
•		capability to scale employees and infrastructure without a diminution in quality of service; and
•		ability to innovate, add new operational expertise and drive down costs.

As the offshore business process outsourcing industry evolves further, we believe that scale, reputation and leadership will become more important factors in this selection process.

Competitive Strengths

We believe that we have the following seven competitive strengths necessary to maintain and enhance our position as a leading provider of offshore business process outsourcing services:

Offshore business process outsourcing market leadership

We have received recognition as an industry leader from various industry bodies or publications. For example:

•		NASSCOM named us one of the top two Indian offshore business process outsourcers in 2006, 2005 and 2004;
•		neoIT ranked us as the best performing business process outsourcing company in 2005;
•		Global Outsourcing named us the leading insurance outsourcer in India in 2005; and
•		the Black Book of Outsourcing ranked us number two among the global BPO services providers in the travel industry, number three among the global BPO services providers in the mortgage banking industry and number six among the global BPO services providers in the market research industry in 2006.

We have provided leadership to the offshore business process outsourcing industry as demonstrated by our anticipation of key industry trends. For example, since our emergence as a focused third party business process outsourcing provider, we have proactively targeted two of the most attractive industry sectors, BFSI and travel. In addition, we have focused our service portfolio on complex processes, avoiding services that are less integral to our clients’ operations, such as telemarketing and collections, which characterized the offshore business process outsourcing industry at that time.

We believe our early differentiation from other players and the substantial length of our working relationship with many industry-leading clients has significantly contributed to our reputation as a trusted provider of offshore business process outsourcing services. We believe that this reputation is a key differentiator in our attracting and winning clients.

Deep industry expertise

We have established expertise in the industries we target. We have developed our business by creating focused business units that provide industry-specific services. Our industry-focused strategy allows us to retain and enhance expertise thereby enabling us to:

•		offer a suite of services that can deliver a comprehensive industry-focused business process outsourcing program;
•		leverage our existing capabilities to win additional clients and identify new industry-specific service offerings;
•		cultivate client relationships that may involve few processes upon initial engagement to develop deeper engagements ultimately involving a number of integrated processes;
•		recruit and retain talented employees by offering them industry-focused career paths; and
•		achieve market leadership in several of the industries we target. For example, we were ranked as the leading insurance outsourcer in India by Global Outsourcing in 2005, as number two among the global BPO services providers in the travel industry by the Black Book of Outsourcing in 2006, and we believe we have the largest and most diverse operations in the offshore travel business process outsourcing market.

Experience in transferring processes offshore and running them efficiently

Many of the business processes that are outsourced by clients to us are mission critical and core to their operations, requiring substantial project management expertise. We have developed a sophisticated program management methodology intended to ensure smooth transfer of business processes from our clients’ facilities to our delivery centers. For example, our highly

experienced program management team has transferred over 400 distinct business processes for over 150 significant clients in the last five years.

We focus on managing our client processes effectively on an ongoing basis. Our process delivery is managed by independent empowered teams and measured regularly against pre-defined operational metrics. We have also invested in a 380-person quality assurance team that satisfies the International Standard Organization 9001:2000 standards for quality management systems, and applies Six Sigma, a statistical methodology for improving consistent quality across processes, and other process re-engineering methodologies to further improve our process delivery.

The composition of our revenue enables us to continuously optimize the efficiency of our operations to achieve higher asset utilization. This is driven by our combination of data and voice services across the different time zones of North America and Europe.

Diversified client base across multiple industries and geographic locations

We have a large, diversified client base of over 150 significant clients across Europe and North America, including clients who are market leaders within their respective industries. We have clients across the multiple sectors of the travel and BFSI industries as well as other industries such as manufacturing, logistics, retail, utilities and professional services. To date, many of our clients have transferred a limited number of their business processes offshore. We believe, therefore, that we have a significant opportunity to increase the revenue we generate from these clients in the future as they decide to expand their commitment to offshore business process outsourcing.

Industry-recognized leadership in human capital development

We are recognized as a leader in human resources management among offshore business process outsourcing companies. We have won a number of awards, including being ranked number one in human capital development in 2005 by neoIT, an industry consultant, and being ranked number one in the Asia Pacific region for excellence in human resources by India’s National Institute of Personnel Managers. Our market leadership and organizational culture enables us to attract and retain high quality employees.

Our extensive recruiting process utilizes sophisticated tools such as the Predictive Index, a psychometric tool we use to help us screen candidates on multiple parameters and to appropriately match employees to the most suitable positions. We have established the WNS Learning Academy, which provides ongoing training to our employees for the purpose of continuously improving their leadership and professional skills. We seek to promote our team leaders and operations managers from within, thereby offering internal advancement opportunities and clear long-term career paths.

Ability to manage the rapid growth of our organization

We have invested significant management effort toward ensuring that our organization is positioned to continuously scale to meet the robust demand for offshore business process outsourcing services. We are capable of evaluating over 9,000 potential employees and recruiting, hiring and training over 900 employees each month, enabling us to rapidly expand and support our clients. We have also established a highly scalable operational infrastructure in multiple locations supported by a world-class information technology and communications network infrastructure.

Experienced management team

We benefit from the effective leadership of a global management team with diverse backgrounds including extensive experience in outsourcing. Most of our core senior management team members have been with us since fiscal 2003, and have successfully executed the growth strategy that has increased our client base from 14 clients as of May 2002 to over 150 significant clients as of March 31, 2007 and increased our revenue from $162.2 million in fiscal 2005 to $352.3 million in fiscal 2007 and our revenue less repair payments from $99.0 million in fiscal 2005 to $219.7 million in fiscal 2007. Moreover, we believe that our management has successfully guided our rapid expansion while increasing client satisfaction, as demonstrated by our in-house customer feedback surveys. In addition to our senior management team, our middle management team provides us with the critical leadership depth needed to manage our rapid growth.

Business Strategy

Our objective is to strengthen our position as a leading offshore business process outsourcing provider. To achieve this, we will seek to expand our client base and further develop our industry expertise, enhance our brand to attract new clients, develop organically new business services and industry-focused operating units and make selective acquisitions. The key elements of our strategy are described below.

Drive rapid growth through penetration of our existing client base

We have a large and diverse existing client base that includes many leading global corporations, most of whom have transferred only a limited number of their business processes offshore. We intend to leverage our expertise in providing comprehensive process solutions by seeking to identify additional processes that can be transferred offshore, cross-selling new services, adding technology-based offerings, and expanding and deepening our existing relationships. We have dedicated account managers tasked with maintaining a thorough understanding of our clients’ outsourcing roadmaps as well as identifying and advocating new offshoring opportunities. As a result of this strategy, we have a strong track record of extending the scope of our client relationships over time.

Enhance awareness of the WNS brand name

Our reputation for operational excellence among our clients has been instrumental in attracting and retaining new clients as well as talented and qualified employees. We believe we have benefited from strong word-of-mouth brand equity in the past. However, as the scale of the offshore business process outsourcing market grows, we will seek to increase client awareness of the WNS brand in our target markets and among potential employees. We also intend to focus on building market awareness of our industry expertise through exposure in industry publications and participation in industry conferences. In order to achieve this enhanced awareness, we are investing in hiring new senior marketing professionals.

Reinforce leadership in existing industries and penetrate new industry sectors

We have a highly successful industry-focused operating model through which we have established a leading offshore business process outsourcing practice in the travel and BFSI sectors. We intend to leverage our in-depth knowledge of these industries to penetrate additional sectors within these industries. For example, in the travel sector, we believe that there are potential opportunities we can exploit in the hotel, cruise-liner and car rental sectors. In addition, we intend to develop our existing expertise in emerging businesses such as the manufacturing, logistics, retail, utilities and professional services industries. We intend to leverage our enterprise services and knowledge services, which are applicable across multiple industries, to first penetrate these targeted industries and thereafter build specific industry expertise to achieve scale with an objective of establishing new industry-focused business units.

Broaden industry expertise and enhance growth through selective acquisitions

Our acquisition strategy is focused on adding new capabilities and industry expertise. Our acquisition track record demonstrates our ability to integrate, manage and develop the specific capabilities we acquire. Our intention is to continue to pursue targeted acquisitions in the future and to rely on our integration capabilities to expand the growth of our business.

Business Process Outsourcing Service Offerings

We offer our services to three main categories of clients through industry-focused business units. First, we serve clients in the travel industry, including airlines, travel intermediaries and other related service providers, for whom we perform services such as customer service and revenue accounting. Second, we serve clients in the BFSI industry, for whom we perform services such as loan processing and insurance claims management. Third, we serve clients in several other industries including manufacturing, retail, logistics, utilities and professional services, which we refer to as emerging businesses. In addition to industry-specific services, we offer a range of services across multiple industries, in areas such as finance and accounting, human resources and supply chain management, which we collectively refer to as enterprise services, and in the areas of market, business and financial research and analytical services, which we refer to as knowledge services. This structure is depicted in the graphic below:

To achieve in-depth understanding of our clients’ industries and provide industry-specific services, each business unit is staffed by a dedicated team of managers and employees engaged in providing business process outsourcing client solutions, and has its own operations, sales, finance, human resources and training teams. In addition, each business unit draws upon common support services from our information technology, corporate communications, corporate finance, risk management and legal departments, which we refer to as our corporate-enabling units.

Travel

According to the NASSCOM-McKinsey report, the travel and hospitality industry presented an addressable offshore business process outsourcing opportunity estimated to be between $10.0 billion and $12.0 billion in fiscal 2007. The current penetration by offshore business process outsourcing providers is approximately 3.0%, leaving considerable growth potential. We believe that we currently have the largest and most diverse service offering among offshore business process outsourcing service providers in the travel domain.

Our service portfolio includes processes that support air, car, hotel, marine and packaged travel services offered by our clients. The key travel industry sectors we serve include:

•		airlines;
•		travel intermediaries; and
•		others such as global distribution systems and network providers.

We serve a diverse client base in this business unit that includes Air Canada, British Airways, Virgin Atlantic Airways, SITA and Travelocity. We also serve 18 other airlines and 16 travel intermediaries. As of March 31, 2007, we had approximately 5,300 employees in this business unit, several hundred of whom have International Air Transport Association, or IATA, certifications. In fiscal 2007 and 2006, this business unit represented 22.8% and 33.1% of our revenue and 36.6% and 45.4% of our revenue less repair payments.

The following graphic illustrates the key areas in which we provide services to clients in this business unit:

Case Study. We were retained by a major airline client that was faced with increasing competitive pressure from low-cost carriers and needed to reduce its costs. We worked with this client to develop an offshore business process outsourcing strategy to fundamentally alter its service delivery model with the goal of increasing its cost efficiency. We initially started providing business process outsourcing services to this client with 12 employees handling a single process. As of March 31, 2007, approximately 1,100 employees were executing over 85 different processes for this client, which included a variety of complex processes. We categorize these processes into six broad areas:

•		customer interaction: customer complaint resolution, loyalty program management;
•		passenger revenue accounting: refunds, fare audit, ticket coupon matching, sales accounting;
•		cargo operations and accounting: scheduling, booking, flight planning, mail revenue accounting;
•		revenue management: seat allocation, processing meal requests, yield maximization through inventory management, fare filing, fare construction and quotation;
•		reporting and analytics: aircraft load factor, costs, market share, revenue and competition reports; and
•		other miscellaneous services: updating employee records, calculation of medical leave and overtime for staff.

We believe that by transferring these processes to us, the client has achieved significant cost savings, and increased its levels of end-customer satisfaction. These benefits are in addition to process-specific productivity improvements such as higher quality and accuracy levels.

BFSI

According to the NASSCOM-McKinsey report, two sectors of the BFSI industry presented an addressable offshore business process outsourcing opportunity estimated to be between $60.0 billion and $75.0 billion in fiscal 2005, with current penetration estimated to be below 9.0%. Of this addressable market, approximately $35.0 billion to $40.0 billion is attributable to the retail banking sector and approximately $25.0 billion to $35.0 billion is attributable to the insurance sector. In 2005, we were ranked as the leading insurance outsourcer in India by Global Outsourcing. We also have growing expertise in the retail and mortgage banking, and asset management sectors.

The key BFSI industry sectors we serve are:

•		integrated financial institutions;
•		mortgage banks and investors in mortgage-backed securities;

•		financial advisory service providers;
•		life, property and casualty, and health insurers;
•		insurance brokers and loss assessors; and
•		self-insured auto fleet owners.

We serve a diverse client base in this business unit that includes AVIVA, First Magnus Financial Corporation and Marsh. We also serve a large US-based financial advisory provider, a top ten UK auto insurer, a large insurance loss adjuster, several self-insured fleet owners and several mortgage-related companies. As of March 31, 2007, we had approximately 4,400 employees working in this business unit. In fiscal 2007 and 2006, revenue from this business unit represented 61.8% and 55.6% of our revenue and revenue less repair payments from this business unit represented 38.7% and 39.1% of our revenue less repair payments.

The following graphic illustrates the key areas in which we provide services to clients in this business unit:

In the areas of retail and mortgage banking, we offer an integrated service delivery solution called Digital Loan Management, or DLM, which combines automated mortgage processing with offshore delivery. Our BFSI business unit also includes our auto claims business, branded WNS Assistance, which is comprised of our WNS Auto Claims BPO segment. WNS Assistance offers a blended onshore-offshore delivery model that enables us to handle the entire automobile insurance claims cycle. We offer comprehensive accident management services to our clients where we arrange for repair of automobiles through a network of repair centers. We also offer claims management services where we process accident insurance claims for our clients. Our employees receive telephone calls reporting automobile accidents, generate electronic insurance claim forms and arrange for automobile repairs in cases of automobile damage. We also provide third party claims handling services including the administration and settlement of property and bodily injury claims while providing repair management and rehabilitation services to our insured and self-insured fleet clients and the end-customers of our insurance company clients. Our service for uninsured losses focuses on recovering repair costs and legal expenses directly from negligent third parties. See “Item 5. Operating and Financial Review and Prospects — Results by Reportable Segment.”

Case Study. We were engaged by a leading US residential mortgage lender, measured by volume, to develop and execute its long-term offshore business process outsourcing strategy, based on our domain expertise and specific focus on mortgage banking. We executed the engagement in a phased manner where low-risk processes such as document indexing were moved offshore first, followed by more complex processes which required a significant degree of specialized training and customization. Since the inception of this relationship in 2003, we have deployed over 500 employees on more than 30 business processes, including loan origination, underwriting, closing, post-closing and loan administration services. In moving these processes offshore, the client has benefited by reducing its operational costs, obtaining quicker turnaround times on transactions, improving accuracy,

quality and capacity management, and gaining an ability to focus on its core competencies such as customer acquisition and new product development.

Emerging Businesses

Our emerging businesses unit addresses the needs of the manufacturing, logistics, retail, utilities and professional services industries. We believe these industries are at a nascent stage of offshore business process outsourcing adoption, and therefore present significant opportunities for growth.

We serve a diverse client base including Centrica, GfK, Fedex and Indymac. In fiscal 2007, we had approximately 4,800 employees in this business unit. In fiscal 2007 and 2006, this business unit represented 15.4% and 11.3% of our revenue and 24.7% and 15.5% of our revenue less repair payments.

Our strategy for the emerging businesses unit is to nurture and develop emerging industry-specific capabilities up to a point of critical mass from which new industry-focused operating units may emerge. We utilize two core service capabilities to penetrate emerging businesses. These capabilities are broadly classified as:

•		Enterprise Services, focused on finance and accounting, human resource and supply chain management services; and
•		Knowledge Services, focused on market, business and financial research and analytical services.

Enterprise Services

Our enterprise services business unit focuses on various functions that are critical to our clients’ businesses. These functions include corporate and transactional accounting, payroll and benefits administration, order entry and tracking, and inbound supply chain and vendor management. The following graphic illustrates the key enterprise services we provide:

Case Study. A leading global gas utility, which is also a Fortune 100 company, retained us in January 2006 for the outsourcing of its transaction processing and finance and accounting services. The client selected us based on our reputation for operational excellence, process improvement, process migration expertise and our global footprint. Our dedicated transition team conducted a detailed evaluation of their existing processes and successfully transferred their back office and financial and accounting processes, as well as their correspondence, house and voice processes which enables them to communicate with their customers and respond to their queries and complaints via written communications, emails and on the telephone, on a new enterprise resource planning platform to our facilities in India within three months. In April 2006, the first process went live in Mumbai and we ramped up the process across multiple locations in a span of six months. Today, there are over 1,200 agents across two cities. During the transition period, a dedicated Six Sigma process improvement team worked hand in hand with the operations team in stabilizing the processes, thereby reducing the learning curve and enabling faster delivery of key metrics.

Knowledge Services

In the knowledge services area, we offer market, business and financial research and analytical services. Our services include complex and high-end analytics which require specialized skill sets. Many of our employees in this area have graduate degrees in statistics, management or accounting, which we believe enables us to secure higher rates for their services as compared to the rates for our other processes.

In May 2007, we acquired Marketics, a provider of offshore analytics services. Over the last three years, Marketics has developed a wide range of technology-enabled analytic services, primarily targeting the sales and marketing organizations of consumer-centric companies. Marketics’ value proposition is focused on enhancing business decision making through the use of complex analytics such as predictive modeling to understand consumer behavior patterns and sales data analytics to support inventory allocation.

The following graphic illustrates the key knowledge services we provide:

Case Study. A leading UK-based market research firm retained us in 2000 to outsource its data processing requirements. This relationship commenced with a two-member team collating and tabulating market research data using sophisticated statistical analysis. In 2003, we expanded our relationship with this client to provide similar services for its North American operations. In 2004, we further expanded our service offerings to include data collection and telephone interviews to collect questionnaire responses. We also started providing research support services which are designed to assist the client’s research staff by undertaking tasks such as desk research, checking the quality of the outputs from various internal functions, graphically representing the data, data interpretation and advanced statistical analysis. As of March 31, 2007, we had over 150 employees working on over 700 market research projects for this client. We believe that our services have enabled the client to compete more effectively in its market.

Sales and Marketing

The offshore business process outsourcing services sales cycle is time consuming and complex in nature. The extended sales cycle generally includes initiating client contact, submitting requests for information and proposals for client business, facilitating client visits to our operational facilities, performing diagnostics studies and conducting pilot implementations to test our delivery capabilities. Due to the complex nature of our sales cycle, we have organized our sales teams by business units and staffed them with professionals who have specialized industry knowledge. This industry focus enables our sales teams to better understand the prospective client’s business needs and offer appropriate industry-focused solutions.

As of March 31, 2007, we had 80 sales and sales support professionals, with 23 based in the UK, 24 based in the US and 33 based in India. Our sales teams work closely with our sales support team in India, which provides critical analytical support throughout the sales cycle. Our front-line sales teams are responsible for identifying and initiating discussions with prospective clients, and selling services in new areas to existing clients. We have strategically recruited our sales teams primarily from the US and the UK.

We also assign dedicated account managers to each of our key clients. These managers work day-to-day with the client and our service delivery teams to address the client’s needs. More importantly, by using the detailed understanding of the client’s business and outsourcing objectives gained through this close interaction, our account managers actively identify and target additional processes that can be outsourced to us. Through this methodology, we have developed a strong track record of increasing our sales to existing clients over time.

Clients

As of March 31, 2007, we had a diverse client base of over 150 significant clients across a variety of industries and process types, including companies that we believe are among the leading players in their respective industries. We define significant clients as those who represent an ongoing business commitment to us, which includes substantially all of our clients within our WNS Global BPO segment and some of our clients within our WNS

Auto Claims BPO segment. These clients offer only occasional business to us because of the small size of their automobile fleets and the consequent infrequent requirement of our auto claims services.

We believe the diversity in our client profile differentiates us from our competitors. See “Item 5. Operating and Financial Review and Prospects — Overview — Revenue” for additional information on our client base.

In fiscal 2007, the following were among our top 25 clients (including their affiliates) by revenue:

Air Canada		Indymac
AVIVA		Marsh
British Airways		SITA
Centrica		Travelocity
Fedex		Virgin Atlantic Airways
First Magnus Financial Corporation
GfK

The table below sets forth the number of our clients by revenue less repair payments for the periods indicated. We believe that the growth in the number of clients who generate more than $1 million of annual revenue less repair payments indicates our ability to extend the depth of our relationships with existing clients over time.

		Year Ended March 31,
		2007				2006
Below $1.0 million			115				109
$1.0 million to $5.0 million			30				18
$5.0 million to $10.0 million			3				0
More than $10.0 million			6				4

Competition

Competition in the business process outsourcing services industry is intense and growing steadily. See “Item 3. Key Information — D. Risk Factors — Risks Related to Our Business — We face competition from onshore and offshore business process outsourcing companies and from information technology companies that also offer business process outsourcing services. Our clients may also choose to run their business processes themselves, either in their home countries or through captive units located offshore.” We compete primarily with:

•		focused business process outsourcing service companies based in offshore locations like India, such as Genpact, Firstsource and ExlService Holdings Inc.;
•		business process outsourcing divisions of numerous information technology service companies located in India such as Infosys BPO Ltd (formerly Progeon Ltd) owned by Infosys Technologies Limited, or Infosys, Tata Consultancy Services Limited, or Tata Consultancy, and Wipro BPO, owned by Wipro Technologies Limited; and
•		global companies such as Accenture Ltd, Affiliated Computer Services Inc., Electronic Data Systems, or EDS, and International Business Machines Corporation, or IBM, which provide an array of products and services including broad-based information technology, software, consulting and business process outsourcing services.

In addition, departments of certain companies may choose to perform their business processes in-house, in some cases via an owned and operated facility in an offshore location such as India. Their employees provide these services as part of their regular business operations.

While companies such as Infosys (through its business process outsourcing subsidiary, Infosys BPO Ltd) and Tata Consultancy can offer clients integrated information technology and business outsourcing services, we believe these companies focus on information technology as their core business. Global companies such as Accenture and IBM have significant client relationships

and information technology capabilities, but we believe these companies are at a disadvantage in the offshore business process outsourcing business on account of their relatively limited offshore focus.

We compete against other offshore business process outsourcing-focused entities like Genpact and ExlServices Holdings Inc. by seeking to provide industry-focused services with an offshore focus and building on our track record of operational excellence.

Intellectual Property

We use a combination of our clients’ software systems, third-party software platforms and systems and, in some cases, our own proprietary software and platforms to provide our services. Our principal proprietary software includes our platform for passenger revenue accounting called JADE, which we use in our travel business unit. In addition, we have an exclusive license to use an auto claims software platform called Claimsflo in the insurance market until 2012. Our proprietary and licensed software allows us to market our services with an integrated solution that combines a technology platform with our core business process outsourcing service offering.

We customarily enter into licensing and non-disclosure agreements with our clients with respect to the use of their software systems and platforms. Our contracts usually provide that all intellectual property created for the use of our clients will be assigned to them. Our employees are also required to sign confidentiality agreements as a condition to their employment.

We have registered the trademark “WNS” and “WNS-Extending Your Enterprise” in the US and India (in certain relevant categories) and have applied to register these trademarks in the European Union.

Technology

We have a dedicated team of technology experts who support clients at each stage of their engagement with us. The team conducts diagnostic studies for prospective clients and designs and executes technology solutions to enable offshore execution and management of the clients’ business processes. We also have wireless-area-network, or WAN, local-area-network, or LAN, and desktop teams that focus on creating and maintaining our large pool of approximately 8,800 workstations and seek to ensure that our associates face minimal loss in time and efficiency in their work processes.

We have a well-developed international telecommunications infrastructure. We use a global wide area network, which we refer to as the WNSNet to connect our clients’ data centers in the UK, Europe, North America and Asia with our delivery centers. WNSNet has extensive security and virus protection capabilities built in to protect the privacy of our clients and their customers and to protect against computer virus attacks. We believe our telecommunications network is adaptable to our clients’ legacy systems as well as to new and emerging technologies. Our telecommunications network is supported by a 24/7 network management system. Our network is designed to eliminate any “single-point-of-failure” in the delivery of services to clients.

Process and Quality Assurance and Risk Management

Our process and quality assurance compliance programs are critical to the success of our operations. We have an independent quality assurance team to monitor, analyze, provide feedback on and report process performance and compliance. Our company-wide quality management system, which employs over 380 quality assurance analysts, focuses on managing our client processes effectively on an ongoing basis. Our process delivery is managed by independent empowered teams and measured regularly against pre-defined operational metrics. We also have a 380-person quality assurance team that satisfies the International Standard Organization (ISO) 9001:2000 standards for quality management systems. We apply the Six Sigma & Lean philosophy, which are statistical methodologies for improving consistent quality across processes as well as quality management principles for improving the operation of our clients’ processes and providing a consistent level of service quality to our clients. As of March 31, 2007, more than 70 of our projects were run according to the Six Sigma principles. We also apply other process re-engineering methodologies to further improve our process delivery and undertake periodic audits of both our information systems policy and implemented controls.

Our risk management framework focuses on two important elements: business continuity planning and information security.

Our approach to business continuity planning involves implementation of an organization-wide business continuity management framework which includes continual self-assessment, strategy formulation, execution and review. Our business continuity strategy leverages our expanding network of delivery centers for operational and technological risk mitigation in the event of a

disaster. To manage our business continuity planning program, we employ a dedicated team of experienced professionals. A customized business continuity strategy is developed for key clients, depending on their specific requirements. For mission-critical processes, operations are typically split across multiple delivery centers in accordance with client-approved customized business continuity plans.

Our approach to information security involves implementation of an organization-wide information security management system, or ISMS, which complies with the British Standards (BS) 7799:2002 or the ISO 27001:2005 for optimal implementation of systems to manage organizational information security risks. These standards seek to ensure that sensitive company information remains secure. Currently, information security systems at five delivery centers are BS 7799:2002 certified and two are ISO 27001:2005 certified, and we expect to seek similar certifications in our other delivery centers.

In addition, our clients, particularly those in the BFSI industry, may be governed by several regulations specific to their industries in their home jurisdictions which may require them to comply with certain process-specific requirements. We identify the process-specific compliance requirements of our clients typically related to regulations such as the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act and the Financial Services Act in the UK and help them maintain compliance in their business processes by implementing control and monitoring procedures. The control and monitoring procedures defined by this function are separate from and in addition to our periodic internal audits.

Human Capital

As of March 31, 2007, we had 15,084 employees, of whom approximately 11,429 were employees who execute client operations, whom we refer to as associates. Approximately 11,011 associates are based in India, with approximately 204 associates in Sri Lanka and approximately 214 associates in the UK. Most of our associates hold university degrees. As of March 31, 2006 and 2005, we had 10,433 and 7,176 employees, respectively. Our employees are not unionized and we have never experienced any work stoppages. We believe that our employee relations are good. We focus heavily on recruiting, training and retaining our employees.

Recruiting and Retention

We believe that we have developed effective human resource strategies and a strong track record in recruiting. As part of our recruiting strategy, we encourage candidates to view joining our organization as choosing a long-term career in the field of travel, BFSI or another specific industry or service area. We use a combination of recruitment from college campuses and professional institutes, via recruitment agencies, job portals, advertisements and walk-in applications. In addition, a significant number of our applicants are referrals by existing employees. We currently recruit an average of 1,300 employees per month.

In fiscal 2007, our overall attrition rate for all associates, following a six-month probationary period, was approximately 43.0%. We believe this rate is broadly in line with our peers in the offshore business process outsourcing industry.

Training and Development

We devote significant resources to the training and development of our associates. Our training typically covers modules in leadership and client processes, including the functional aspects of client processes such as quality and transfer. Training for new associates may also include behavioral and process training as well as culture, voice and accent training, as required by our clients. We have established the WNS Learning Academy where we offer specialized skills development, such as interviewing, coaching and presentation skills, and leadership development programs for associates as they move up the corporate hierarchy. The WNS Learning Academy is staffed with over 40 full-time trainers and content designers. We customize our training programs according to the nature of the client’s business, the country in which the client operates and the services the client requires. By offering such training programs, we seek to ensure that associates who assume leadership positions within our organization are equipped with the necessary skills. Further, the WNS Learning Academy has an in-house e-learning unit which creates computer or web-based learning modules to support ongoing learning and development. The WNS Learning Academy also caters to our knowledge management.

Regulations

Due to the industry and geographic diversity of our operations and services, our operations are subject to a variety of rules and regulations, and several Indian, Sri Lankan, UK, Europe and US federal and state agencies regulate various aspects of our business. See “Item 3. Key Information — D. Risk Factors — Risks Related to our Business — Failure to adhere to the

regulations that govern our business could result in us being unable to effectively perform our services. Failure to adhere to regulations that govern our clients’ businesses could result in breaches of contract with our clients.”

Regulation of our industry by the Indian government affects our business in several ways. We benefit from certain tax incentives promulgated by the Indian government, including a tax holiday from Indian corporate income taxes for the operation of most of our Indian facilities, which will begin to expire in stages from April 1, 2008 through April 1, 2009. As a result of these incentives, our operations have been subject to lower Indian tax liabilities. In May 2007, the Indian Finance Act, 2007 was adopted, with the effect of subjecting Indian companies that benefit from a holiday from Indian corporate income taxes to the minimum alternate tax, or MAT, at the rate of 11.33% in the case of profits exceeding Rs. 10 million and 10.3% in the case of profits not exceeding Rs. 10 million with effect from April 1, 2007. As a result of this amendment to the tax regulations, we will be subject to MAT commencing fiscal 2008. To the extent MAT paid exceeds the actual tax payable on the taxable income, we would be able to set off such MAT credits against tax payable in the succeeding seven years, subject to the satisfaction of certain conditions. In addition to this tax holiday, our Indian subsidiaries are also entitled to certain benefits under relevant state legislation/regulations. These benefits include preferential allotment of land in industrial areas developed by the state agencies, incentives for captive power generation, rebates and waivers in relation to payments for transfer of property and registration (including for purchase or lease of premises) and commercial usage of electricity. Our subsidiaries in India are also subject to certain currency transfer restrictions. See “Item 5. Operating and Financial Review and Prospects — Critical Accounting Policies — Income Taxes” and Note 2 to our consolidated financial statements included elsewhere in this annual report for more details regarding foreign currency translations.

Enforcement of Civil Liabilities

We are incorporated in Jersey, Channel Islands. Most of our directors and executive officers reside outside of the US. Substantially all of the assets of these persons and substantially all of our assets are located outside the US. As a result, it may not be possible for investors to effect service of process on these persons or us within the US, or to enforce against these persons or us, either inside or outside the US, a judgment obtained in a US court predicated upon the civil liability provisions of the federal securities or other laws of the US or any state thereof. A judgment of a US court is not directly enforceable in Jersey, but constitutes a cause of action which will be enforced by Jersey courts provided that:

•		the court which pronounced the judgment has jurisdiction to entertain the case according to the principles recognized by Jersey law with reference to the jurisdiction of the US courts;
•		the judgment is final and conclusive — it cannot be altered by the courts which pronounced it;
•		there is payable pursuant to the judgment a sum of money, not being a sum payable in respect of tax or other charges of a like nature or in respect of a fine or other penalty;
•		the courts of the US have jurisdiction in the circumstances of the case;
•		the judgment can be enforced by execution in the jurisdiction in which the judgment is given;
•		the person against whom the judgment is given does not benefit from immunity under the principles of public international law;
•		there is no earlier judgment in another court between the same parties on the same issues as are dealt with in the judgment to be enforced;
•		the judgment was not obtained by fraud, duress and was not based on a clear mistake of fact; and
•		the recognition and enforcement of the judgment is not contrary to public policy in Jersey, including observance of the principles of natural justice which require that documents in the US proceeding were properly served on the defendant and that the defendant was given the right to be heard and represented by counsel in a free and fair trial before an impartial tribunal.

It is the policy of Jersey courts to award compensation for the loss or damage actually sustained by the person to whom the compensation is awarded. Although the award of punitive damages is generally unknown to the Jersey legal system, that does not mean that awards of punitive damages are not necessarily contrary to public policy. Whether a judgment was contrary to public policy depends on the facts of each case. Exorbitant, unconscionable, or excessive awards will generally be contrary to public policy. Moreover, if a US court gives a judgment for multiple damages against a qualifying defendant the amount which may be payable by such defendant may be limited by virtue of the Protection of Trading Interests Act 1980, an Act of the UK extended to Jersey by the Protection of Trading Interests Act 1980 (Jersey) Order, 1983, which provides that such qualifying defendant may be able to recover such amount paid by it as represents the excess of such multiple damages over the sum assessed as compensation by the court that gave the judgment. A “qualifying defendant” for these purposes is a citizen of the UK and Colonies, a body corporate incorporated in the UK, Jersey or other territory for whose international relations the United Kingdom is responsible or a person carrying on business in Jersey.

Jersey courts cannot enter into the merits of the foreign judgment and cannot act as a court of appeal or review over the foreign courts. It is doubtful whether an original action based on US federal securities laws can be brought before Jersey courts. A plaintiff who is not resident in Jersey may be required to provide security for costs in the event of proceedings being initiated in Jersey.

There is uncertainty as to whether the courts of India would, and Mourant du Feu & Jeune, our counsel as to Jersey law, have advised us that there is uncertainty as to whether the courts of Jersey would:

•		recognize or enforce judgments of US courts obtained against us or our directors or officers predicated upon the civil liability provisions of the securities laws of the US or any state in the US; or
•		entertain original actions brought in each respective jurisdiction against us or our directors or officers predicated upon the federal securities laws of the US or any state in the US.

Section 44A of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (India), or the Civil Code, as amended, provides that where a foreign judgment has been rendered by a superior court in any country or territory outside India which the Indian government has by notification declared to be a reciprocating territory, such foreign judgment may be enforced in India by proceedings in execution as if the judgment had been rendered by the relevant superior court in India. Section 44A of the Civil Code is applicable only to monetary decrees not being in the nature of amounts payable in respect of taxes or other charges of a similar nature or in respect of fines or other penalties and does not include arbitration awards. The U.S. has not been declared by the Indian government to be a reciprocating territory for the purposes of Section 44A of the Civil Code.

A judgment of a foreign court may be enforced in India only by a suit upon the judgment, subject to Section 13 of the Civil Code and not by proceedings in execution. This section, which is the statutory basis for the recognition of foreign judgments, states that a foreign judgment is conclusive as to any matter directly adjudicated upon except:

•		where the judgment has not been pronounced by a court of competent jurisdiction;
•		where the judgment has not been given on the merits of the case;
•		where the judgment appears on the face of the proceedings to be founded on an incorrect view of international law or a refusal to recognize the law of India in cases where such law is applicable;
•		where the proceedings in which the judgment was obtained were opposed to natural justice;
•		where the judgment has been obtained by fraud; or
•		where the judgment sustains a claim founded on a breach of any law in force in India.

The suit must be brought in India within three years from the date of the judgment in the same manner as any other suit filed to enforce a civil liability in India. Generally, there are considerable delays in the disposal of suits by Indian courts. It is unlikely that a court in India would award damages on the same basis as a foreign court if an action is brought in India. Furthermore, it is unlikely that an Indian court would enforce foreign judgments if it viewed the amount of damages awarded as excessive or

inconsistent with Indian practice. A party seeking to enforce a foreign judgment in India is required to obtain prior approval from the Reserve Bank of India under the Indian Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999, to repatriate any amount recovered pursuant to such execution. Any judgment in a foreign currency would be converted into Indian rupees on the date of judgment and not on the date of payment.

C. Organizational Structure

The following diagram illustrates our company’s organizational structure and the place of organization of each of our subsidiaries as of the date hereof. Unless otherwise indicated, each of our subsidiary is 100% owned, directly or indirectly, by WNS (Holdings) Limited.

D. Property, Plants and Equipment

We currently have an installed capacity of approximately 8,713 workstations, or seats, that can operate on an uninterrupted 24/7 basis and can be staffed on a three-shift per day basis. We lease all of our properties, and most of our leases are renewable at our option. We also have one sales office each in the US and in the UK. The following table describes each of our delivery centers, including centers under construction, and sets forth our lease expiration dates:

Space

Number of

Location

(square feet)

Workstations/Seats

Lease Expiration

Extendable Until(1)

India:

Mumbai

Plant 10

84,429

987

May 15, 2008

N/A

Plant 11 (old)

15,323

177

April 30, 2008

N/A

Plant 11

69,611

728

January 23, 2009

October 23, 2012

Raheja (Units 001/902)

13,770

248

January 29, 2015

N/A

Raheja (Unit 101)

22,000

206

April 30, 2015

N/A

Raheja (Units 002/201)

24,600

205

April 30, 2015

N/A

229,733

Gurgaon

Tower A & B

90,995

799

October 31, 2009/ November 30, 2009

April 30, 2014/ May 31, 2014

Tower C

51,244

661

September 30, 2010

March 31, 2015

Building 6 (Phase I)(2)

52,472

August 31, 2012

N/A

Building 6 (Phase II) (2)

39,734

September 30, 2012

N/A

Building 6 (Phase III) (2)

42,914

1,600

(2)

December 31, 2012

N/A

277,359

Pune

Sofotel

142,800

1,782

December 31, 2011

N/A

NTrance(3)

66,460

900

March 9, 2014/ August 5, 2014

N/A

Level 1

36,700

364

February 2, 2012

N/A

Level 2

36,700

349

August 30, 2011

N/A

Level 4

36,700

351

February 2, 2011

N/A

319,360

Nashik

Unity

21,385

277

April 30, 2007

December 30, 2009

Shreeniketan

33,410

550

September 30, 2007

December 30, 2010

54,795

Sri Lanka:(3)

Colombo

30,000

373

July 31, 2007

July 31, 2010

UK:

Ipswich

10,704

120

August 26, 2012

N/A

US:

New York

3,149

N/A

May 31, 2008

N/A

Our delivery centers are equipped with fiber optic connectivity and have backups to their power supply designed to achieve uninterrupted operations. In fiscal 2008, we intend to open new delivery centers in Pune, Mumbai, Gurgaon and Bucharest.

ITEM 4A. UNRESOLVED STAFF COMMENTS

None.

ITEM 5. OPERATING AND FINANCIAL REVIEW AND PROSPECTS

The following discussion on the financial condition and results of operations of our company should be read in conjunction with our consolidated financial statements and the related notes included elsewhere in this annual report. Some of the statements in the following discussion contain forward-looking statements that involve risks and uncertainties. Our actual results could differ materially from those anticipated in these forward-looking statements as a result of a number of factors, including, but not limited to, those described below and elsewhere in this annual report, particularly in the risk factors described in “Item 3 . Key Information — D. Risk Factors.”

Overview

We are a leading provider of offshore business process outsourcing, or BPO, services. We provide comprehensive data, voice and analytical services to our clients, which are typically companies located in Europe and North America. As of March 31, 2007, we had 15,084 employees across all our delivery centers. According to NASSCOM, we were among the top two India-based offshore business process outsourcing companies in terms of revenue in 2004, 2005 and 2006.

Although we typically enter into long-term contractual arrangements with our clients, these contracts can usually be terminated with or without cause by our clients and often with short notice periods. Nevertheless, our client relationships tend to be long-term in nature given the scale and complexity of the services we provide coupled with risks and costs associated with switching processes in-house or to other service providers. We structure each contract to meet our clients’ specific business requirements and our target rate of return over the life of the contract. In addition, since the sales cycle for offshore business process outsourcing is long and complex, it is often difficult to predict the timing of new client engagements. As a result, we may experience fluctuations in growth rates and profitability from quarter to quarter, depending on the timing and nature of new contracts. Our focus, however, is on deepening our client relationships and maximizing shareholder value over the life of a client’s relationship with us.

Our revenue is generated primarily from providing business process outsourcing services. We have two reportable segments for financial statement reporting purposes — WNS Global BPO and WNS Auto Claims BPO. In our WNS Auto Claims BPO segment we provide claims handling and accident management services, where we arrange for automobile repairs through a network of third party repair centers. In our accident management services, we act as the principal in our dealings with the third party repair centers and our clients. The amounts we invoice to our clients for payments made by us to third party repair centers is reported as revenue. Since we wholly subcontract the repairs to the repair centers, we evaluate our financial performance based on revenue net of payments to third party repair centers which is a non-GAAP measure. We believe that revenue less repair payments reflects more accurately the value addition of the business process services that we directly provide to our clients. See “— Results by Reportable Segment.” The presentation of this non-GAAP information is not meant to be considered in isolation or as a substitute for our financial results prepared in accordance with US GAAP. Our revenue less repair payments may not be comparable to similarly titled measures reported by other companies due to potential differences in the method of calculation.

Between fiscal 2005 and fiscal 2007, our revenue grew from $162.2 million to $352.3 million, representing a compound annual growth rate of 47.4%, and our revenue less repair payments grew from $99.0 million to $219.7 million, representing a compound annual growth rate of 49.0%. During this period, we grew both organically and through acquisitions.

The following table reconciles our revenue (a GAAP measure) to revenue less repair payments (a non-GAAP measure):

		Year Ended March 31,
		2007				2006				2005				2004
		(US dollars in millions)
Revenue		$	352.3			$	202.8			$	162.2			$	104.1
Less: Payments to repair centers		$	132.6			$	54.9			$	63.2			$	54.2
Revenue less repair payments		$	219.7			$	147.9			$	99.0			$	49.9

Our History and Milestones

We began operations as an in-house unit of British Airways in 1996, and became a focused third-party business process outsourcing service provider in fiscal 2003. The following are the key milestones in our operating history since Warburg Pincus acquired a controlling stake in our company from British Airways in May 2002 and inducted a new senior management team.

•		In fiscal 2003, we acquired Town & Country Assistance Limited (which we subsequently rebranded as WNS Assistance and which constitutes our reportable segment for financial statement purposes, called WNS Auto Claims BPO), a UK-based automobile claims handling company, thereby extending our service portfolio beyond the travel industry to include insurance-based automobile claims processing;
•		In fiscal 2003, we invested in capabilities to begin providing enterprise services and knowledge services to address the requirements of emerging industry segments in the offshore outsourcing context;
•		In fiscal 2003 and 2004, we invested in our infrastructure to expand our service portfolio from data-oriented processing to include complex voice and blended data/voice service capabilities, and commenced offering comprehensive processes in the travel and banking, financial services and insurance, or BFSI, industries;
•		In fiscal 2004, we acquired the health claims management business of Greensnow Inc.;
•		In fiscal 2005, we opened facilities in Gurgaon, India and Colombo, Sri Lanka, thereby expanding our operating footprints across India, Sri Lanka and the UK;
•		In fiscal 2006, we acquired Trinity Partners (which we subsequently merged into our subsidiary, WNS North America Inc.), a provider of business process outsourcing services to financial institutions, focusing on mortgage banking;
•		In fiscal 2007, we expanded our facilities in Pune, Gurgaon and Mumbai and we also acquired from PRG Airlines Services Limited its fare audit services business;
•		In May 2007, we acquired Marketics, a provider of offshore analytics services; and
•		In June 2007, we acquired Flovate, a company engaged in the development and maintenance of software products and solutions.

As a result of these acquisitions and other corporate developments, our financial results in corresponding periods may not be directly comparable. Since fiscal 2003, the primary driver of our revenue growth has been organic business development, supplemented to a lesser extent by strategic acquisitions.

Revenue

We generate revenue by providing business process outsourcing services to our clients. In fiscal 2007, our revenue was $352.3 million as compared to $202.8 million in fiscal 2006, representing an increase of 73.7%. In fiscal 2007, our revenue less repair payments was $219.7 million as compared to $147.9 million in fiscal 2006, representing an increase of 48.5%.

We believe that we have been successful in achieving strong revenue growth due to a number of factors, including our understanding of our clients’ industries, our focus on operational excellence and our world-class management team with

significant experience in the global outsourcing industry. We have been successful in building a large client base that is diversified across industries and geographies. Our client base grew from 14 clients in May 2002 to more than 150 significant clients as of March 31, 2007 (for our definition of significant clients, see “Item 4. Information on the Company — B. Business Overview — Clients”). During fiscal 2007, fiscal 2006 and fiscal 2005, we added 25, 47 and 46 significant clients, respectively.

Our revenue is characterized by client, industry and geographic diversity, as the analysis below indicates.

Revenue by Top Clients

Since the time of the Warburg Pincus investment in our company, we have increased our client base and significantly reduced our client concentration. Prior to this investment, our largest client contributed over 90% of our revenue. In comparison, during fiscal 2007, our largest client contributed 18.5% of our revenue and 12.2% of our revenue less repair payments.

The following table sets forth the percentage of revenue and revenue less repair payments that we derived from our largest clients for the periods indicated:

		Revenue												Revenue Less Repair Payments
		Year Ended March 31,												Year Ended March 31,
		2007				2006				2005				2007				2006				2005
Top five clients			55.2	%			41.0	%			40.1	%			45.7	%			52.8	%			56.4	%
Top ten clients			70.1	%			58.5	%			61.4	%			61.9	%			65.5	%			68.8	%
Top 20 clients			79.3	%			73.0	%			76.1	%			74.7	%			78.1	%			82.3	%

During fiscal 2007, we had two clients that individually contributed more than 10% of our revenue and our revenue less repair payments: AVIVA and Travelocity. These two clients collectively contributed 23.5% of our revenue less repair payments during fiscal 2007.

Revenue by Industry

For financial statement reporting purposes, we aggregate several of our operating segments, except for WNS Auto Claims BPO (which we market under the WNS Assistance brand) as it does not meet the aggregation criteria under GAAP. See “— Results by Reportable Segment.”

To achieve in-depth domain expertise and provide industry-specific services to our clients, we organize our business delivery along industry-focused business units. These business units seek to leverage our domain expertise to deliver industry-specific services to our clients. Accordingly, our industry-focused business units are:

•		travel;
•		BFSI (which includes our WNS Auto Claims BPO segment); and
•		emerging businesses (which includes manufacturing, logistics, retail, utilities and professional services).

In May 2002, when Warburg Pincus acquired a majority stake in our business, we were primarily providing business process outsourcing services to airlines. Since then we have expanded our service portfolio across the travel industry and have also established significant operations in BFSI and other industries, which we include in our emerging businesses business unit. Our revenue and revenue less repair payments are diversified along these business units in the proportions and for the periods set forth in the table below:

		Revenue												Revenue Less Repair Payments
		Year Ended March 31,												Year Ended March 31,
Business Units		2007				2006				2005				2007				2006				2005
Travel			22.8	%			33.1	%			29.8	%			36.6	%			45.4	%			48.8	%
BFSI			61.8	%			55.6	%			61.4	%			38.7	%			39.1	%			36.8	%
Emerging businesses			15.4	%			11.3	%			8.8	%			24.7	%			15.5	%			14.4	%
Total			100.0	%			100.0	%			100.0	%			100.0	%			100.0	%			100.0	%

Revenue by Geography

The majority of our clients are located in Europe (primarily the UK) and North America (primarily the US). Since the time of the Warburg Pincus investment in our company in fiscal 2003, we have invested in establishing a sales and marketing presence in North America, which has resulted in an increasing proportion of our revenue coming from North America. The share of our revenue from North America has grown to 22.9% in fiscal 2007 from 17.3% in fiscal 2005. The share of our revenue less repair payments from North America has grown to 36.8% in fiscal 2007 from 28.3% in fiscal 2005. We expect this trend to continue on revenue less repair payments basis in the future.

The following table sets forth the composition of our revenue and revenue less repair payments based on the location of our clients in our key geographies for the periods indicated:

		Revenue												Revenue Less Repair Payments
		Year Ended March 31,												Year Ended March 31,
Locations		2007				2006				2005				2007				2006				2005
UK			53.9	%			62.6	%			65.1	%			50.5	%			49.6	%			51.6	%
Europe (excluding UK)			22.4	%			12.5	%			17.1	%			11.5	%			16.3	%			19.2	%
North America (primarily US)			22.9	%			24.2	%			17.3	%			36.8	%			33.2	%			28.3	%
Rest of World			0.8	%			0.7	%			0.5	%			1.2	%			0.9	%			0.9	%
Total			100.0	%			100.0	%			100.0	%			100.0	%			100.0	%			100.0	%

Our Contracts

We provide our services under contracts with our clients, the majority of which have terms ranging between three and five years, with some being rolling contracts with no end dates. Typically, these contracts can be terminated by our clients with or without cause and with notice periods ranging from three to six months. However, we tend to have long-term relationships with our clients given the complex and comprehensive nature of the business processes executed by us, coupled with the switching costs and risks associated with relocating these processes in-house or to other service providers.

Each client contract has different terms and conditions based on the scope of services to be delivered and the requirements of that client. Occasionally, we may incur significant costs on certain contracts in the early stages of implementation, with the expectation that these costs will be recouped over the life of the contract to achieve our targeted returns. Each client contract has corresponding service level agreements that define certain operational metrics based on which our performance is measured. Some of our contracts specify penalties or damages payable by us in the event of failure to meet certain key service level standards within an agreed upon time frame.

When we are engaged by a client, we typically transfer that client’s processes to our delivery centers over a two to six month period. This transfer process is subject to a number of potential delays. Therefore, we may not recognize significant revenue until several months after commencing a client engagement.

In the WNS Global BPO segment, we charge for our services primarily based on three pricing models — per full-time-equivalent; per transaction; or cost-plus — as follows:

•		per full-time-equivalent arrangements typically involve billings based on the number of full-time employees (or equivalent) deployed on the execution of the business process outsourced;
•		per transaction arrangements typically involve billings based on the number of transactions processed (such as the number of e-mail responses, or airline coupons or insurance claims processed); and
•		cost-plus arrangements typically involve billing the contractually agreed direct and indirect costs and a fee based on the number of employees deployed under the arrangement.

Our prior contract with one of our major clients, British Airways, would have expired in March 2007. In July 2006, we entered into a definitive contract with British Airways to replace the prior contract. The new contract will expire in May 2012. Under the new contract the parties have agreed to change the basis of pricing for a portion of the contracted services over a transition period from a “per full time equivalent basis” to a “per unit transaction basis.” This change could have the effect of reducing the amount of revenue that we receive under this contract for the same level of services. The change to a “per unit transaction price” basis also allows us to share benefits from increases in efficiency in performing services under this contract.

Our contracts with another major client, AVIVA, to provide business process outsourcing services grant AVIVA the option to require us to transfer our facilities at Sri Lanka and Pune to this client. On January 1, 2007, AVIVA exercised its call option requiring us to transfer the Sri Lanka facility to AVIVA effective July 1, 2007. Effective July 1, 2007, we will lose all revenue generated by the Sri Lanka facility and this will negatively impact our revenues and result of operations. For fiscal 2007, 2006 and 2005, the Sri Lanka facility accounted for 1.9%, 3.3% and 1.1% of our revenue, respectively, and 3.0%, 4.5% and 1.7% of our revenue less repair payments, respectively. If the option to transfer the Pune facility is exercised, we will be required to transfer the AVIVA Pune facility to AVIVA on or after December 31, 2007 and we lose all revenue from AVIVA. For fiscal 2007, 2006 and 2005, the Pune facility accounted for 5.2%, 6.5% and 5.1% of our revenue, respectively, and 8.3%, 8.8% and 8.4% of our revenue less repair payments, respectively. See “Item 3. Key Information — D. Risk Factors — Risks Related to Our Business — We may lose some or all of the revenue generated by one of our major clients.”

A small part of our revenue is comprised of reimbursements of out-of-pocket expenses incurred by us in providing services to our clients.

In our WNS Auto Claims BPO segment, we earn revenue from claims handling and accident management services. For claims handling, we charge on a per claim basis or a fixed fee per vehicle over a contract period. For automobile accident management services, where we arrange for the repairs through a network of repair centers that we have established, we invoice the client for the amount of the repair. When we direct a vehicle to a specific repair center, we receive a referral fee from that repair center.

Overall, we believe that we have established a sustainable business model which offers revenue visibility over a substantial portion of our business. We have done so by:

•		developing a broad client base which has resulted in limited reliance on any particular client;
•		seeking to balance our revenue base by targeting industries that offer significant offshore outsourcing potential;
•		addressing the largest markets for offshore business process outsourcing services, which provide geographic diversity across our client base; and
•		focusing our service mix on diverse data, voice and analytical processes, resulting in enhanced client retention.

Expenses

The majority of our expenses is comprised of cost of revenue and operating expenses. The key components of our cost of revenue are payments to repair centers, employee costs and infrastructure-related costs. Our operating expenses include SG&A and amortization of intangible assets. Our non-operating expenses include interest expenses, other income and other expenses.

Cost of Revenue

Our WNS Auto Claims BPO segment includes automobile accident management services, where we arrange for repairs through a network of repair centers. The payments to repair centers represent the largest component of cost of revenue. The value of these payments in any given period is primarily driven by the volume of accidents and the amount of the repair costs related to such accidents.

Our next most significant component of cost of revenue is employee costs. In addition to employee salaries, employee costs include costs related to recruitment, training and retention. Historically, our employee costs have increased primarily due to increases in number of employees to support our growth and, to a lesser extent, to recruit, train and retain employees. Salary levels in India and our ability to efficiently manage and retain our employees significantly influence our cost of revenue. See

“Item 4. Information on the Company — B. Business Overview — Human Capital.” We expect our employee costs to increase as we continue to increase our headcount to service additional business and as wages continue to increase in India. See “Item. 3. Key Information. — D. Risk Factors — Risks Related to Our Business — Wage increases in India may prevent us from sustaining our competitive advantage and may reduce our profit margin.” We seek to mitigate these cost increases through improvements in employee productivity, employee retention and asset utilization.

Our infrastructure costs are comprised of depreciation, lease rentals, facilities management and telecommunication network cost. Most of our leases for our facilities are long-term agreements and have escalation clauses which provide for increases in rent at periodic intervals commencing between three and five years from the start of the lease. Most of these agreements have clauses that cap escalation of lease rentals.

We create capacity in our operational infrastructure ahead of anticipated demand as it takes six to nine months to build up a new site. Hence, our cost of revenue as a percentage of revenue may be higher during periods in which we carry such additional capacity.

Once we are engaged by a client in a new contract, we normally have a transition period to transfer the clients’ processes to our delivery centers and accordingly incur costs related to such transfer. Therefore, our cost of revenue in relation to our revenue may be higher until the transfer phase is completed, which may last for two to six months.

We entered into a particular contract with a new major client in January 2004 for the outsourcing of their back-office and contact center operations, in which we were required to bear the cost of the client’s resources located in North America that were used by us to provide the business process outsourcing services during a transfer period of approximately one year. The payments for such client resources decreased over the transfer period, which was substantially completed by December 2004. The payment for use of these resources amounted to $19.2 million during fiscal 2005, which was a significant component of our cost of revenue during fiscal 2005. While it is possible that WNS might enter into a similar contract in the future, WNS has no current contracts with similar arrangements or current plans to enter into any such similar contracts.

SG&A Expenses

Our SG&A expenses are primarily comprised of corporate employee costs for sales and marketing, general and administrative and other support personnel, travel expenses, legal and professional fees, share-based compensation expense, brand building expenses, and other general expenses not related to cost of revenue.

SG&A expenses as a proportion of revenue were 14.9% in fiscal 2007 as compared with 17.9% for fiscal 2006. SG&A expenses as a proportion of revenue less repair payments were 23.9% in fiscal 2007 as compared with 24.6% for fiscal 2006. We expect SG&A expenses as a proportion of revenue less repair payments to continue to decline over the next few years.

We expect our corporate employee costs for general and administrative and other support personnel to increase in fiscal 2008 but at a lower rate than the increase in our revenue less repair payments.

We expect the employee costs associated with sales and marketing and related travel costs to increase in fiscal 2008. See “Item 4. Information on the Company — B. Business Overview — Business Strategy — Enhance awareness of the WNS brand name.” Our sales team is compensated based on achievement of business targets set at the beginning of each fiscal year. Accordingly, we expect this variable component of the sales team costs to increase in line with overall business growth.

Prior to April 1, 2006, we accounted for our employee share-based compensation plan using the intrinsic value method of accounting prescribed by the Accounting Principles Board, or APB, Opinion No. 25, “Accounting for Stock Issued to Employees” and related interpretations, as permitted by SFAS No. 123, “Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation.” Effective April 1, 2006, we adopted the Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 123 (revised 2004), “Share-Based Payment,” or SFAS 123(R), which are based on the fair value of the equity instruments of an enterprise issued in exchange for employee services, using the prospective transition method. As a result, our income before income taxes and net income for fiscal 2007 are lower by $0.7 million and $0.3 million, respectively, than if we had continued to account for share-based compensation under APB Opinion No. 25. Basic and diluted earnings per share for fiscal 2007 will remain unchanged if we had continued to account for share-based compensation under APB Opinion No. 25. See Note 2 to our consolidated financial statements included elsewhere in this annual report for more details.

Amortization of Intangible Assets

Amortization of intangible assets is associated with our acquisitions of Trinity Partners in November 2005, PRG Airline Services Limited’s fare audit services business in August 2006 and GHS Holdings Limited’s financial accounting business in September 2006.

Non-Operating Income (Expense), Net

Non-operating income (expense), net is comprised of interest expenses, other expenses and other income. Other expenses and other income include interest income and foreign exchange gains or losses. Interest expense primarily relates to interest charges arising from short-term note payable which is paid prior to each fiscal year end.

Foreign Exchange

Exchange Rates

Although a substantial portion of our revenue and revenue less repair payments is denominated in pound sterling (71.5% and 54.4%, respectively, in fiscal 2007, 70.2% and 59.1%, respectively, in fiscal 2006 and 77.4% and 62.9%, respectively, in fiscal 2005) and US dollars (24.8% and 39.8%, respectively, in fiscal 2007, 24.4% and 33.4%, respectively, in fiscal 2006 and 17.7% and 28.9%, respectively, in fiscal 2005), most of our expenses (net of payments to repair centers) (86.0% in fiscal 2007, 77.5% in fiscal 2006 and 80.0% in fiscal 2005) are incurred and paid in Indian rupees. The exchange rates between the Indian rupee and the US dollar and between the pound sterling and the US dollar have changed substantially in recent years and may fluctuate substantially in the future. We report our financial results in US dollars and our results of operations may be adversely affected if the pound sterling depreciates against the US dollar or the Indian rupee appreciates against the US dollar. See “Item 11. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk — B. Risk Management Procedures — Components of Market Risk — Exchange Rate Risk.”

In addition, we carry current assets and current liabilities such as accounts receivable and accounts payable in foreign currencies on our balance sheet. The translation of such balance sheet accounts denominated in foreign currencies into US dollars (which is our reporting currency) is at the rate in effect at the balance sheet date. Adjustments resulting from the translation of our financial statements from functional currency to reporting currency are accumulated and reported as other comprehensive income (loss), which is a separate component of shareholder’s equity. Foreign currency transaction gains and losses are recorded as other income or expense.

Currency Regulation

Our Indian subsidiary, WNS Global, is registered as an exporter of business process outsourcing services with the Software Technology Parks of India, or STPI. According to the prevailing foreign exchange regulations in India, an exporter of business process outsourcing services registered with the STPI is required to receive its export proceeds in India within a period of 12 months from the date of such exports in order to avail itself of the tax and other benefits associated with STPI status. Units which are not registered with STPI are required to receive these proceeds within six months. In the event that such a registered exporter has received any advance against exports in foreign exchange from its overseas customers, it is required to render the requisite services so that such advances are earned within a period of 12 months from the date of such receipt. If WNS Global does not meet these conditions, it will be required to obtain permission from the Reserve Bank of India to receive and realize such foreign currency earnings.

A majority of the payments we receive from our clients are denominated in pound sterling, US dollars and Euros. For most of our clients, our operating subsidiaries in the UK and the US enter into contractual agreements directly with our clients for the provision of business process outsourcing services by WNS Global. WNS Global holds the foreign currency it receives in an export earners foreign currency account. All foreign exchange requirements, such as for the import of capital goods, expenses incurred during overseas travel by employees and discharge of foreign exchange expenses or liabilities, can be met using the foreign currency in the export earners foreign currency account in India. As and when funds are required by us, the funds in the export earners’ foreign currency account may be transferred to an ordinary rupee-denominated account in India.

There are currently no Jersey, UK or US foreign exchange control restrictions on the payment of dividends on our ordinary shares or on the conduct of our operations.

Income Taxes

We operate in multiple tax jurisdictions including India, the UK and the US. As a result, our effective tax rate will change from year to year based on recurring factors such as the geographical mix of income before taxes, state and local taxes, the ratio of permanent items to pretax book income and the implementation of various global tax strategies, as well as non-recurring events.

Our Indian operations are eligible to claim income tax exemption with respect to profits earned from export revenue by various delivery centers registered with STPI. This benefit is available from the date of commencement of operations to March 31, 2009, subject to a maximum of ten years. We have 10 such delivery centers in India in fiscal 2007 and 2006 and nine such delivery centers in fiscal 2005. The tax benefits of these delivery centers expire in stages from April 1, 2008 to April 1, 2009.

As a result of the tax benefits described above, our income derived from our business process outsourcing service operations are not subject to corporate tax in India. The additional income tax expense we would otherwise have had to pay at the statutory rate in India, if the tax exemption was not available, would have been approximately $8.7 million for fiscal 2007, $4.7 million for fiscal 2006 and $0.8 million for fiscal 2005. When our tax holiday expires or is withdrawn by Indian tax authorities, our tax expense will materially increase. In the absence of a tax holiday, income derived from India would be taxed up to a maximum of the then prevailing annual tax rate which, as of March 31, 2007, was 33.66%. We have not recognized a deferred tax asset on carried forward losses as there is uncertainty regarding the availability of such operating losses in subsequent years.

In May 2007, the Indian Finance Act, 2007 was adopted, with the effect of subjecting Indian companies that benefit from a holiday from Indian corporate income taxes to the minimum alternate tax, or MAT, at the rate of 11.33% in the case of profits exceeding Rs. 10 million and 10.3% in the case of profits not exceeding Rs. 10 million with effect from April 1, 2007. To the extent MAT paid exceeds the actual tax payable on the taxable income, such companies would be able to set off such MAT credits against tax payable in the succeeding seven years, subject to the satisfaction of certain conditions. As a result of this amendment to the tax regulations, we will be subject to MAT and be required to pay additional taxes commencing fiscal 2008. To the extent MAT paid exceeds the actual tax payable on our taxable income, we would be able to set off such MAT credits against tax payable in the succeeding seven years, subject to the satisfaction of certain conditions. We expect to be able to set off our MAT payments against our increased tax liability based on taxable income when our tax holiday expires or is withdrawn by the Indian tax authorities.

In addition, in May 2007, the government of India implemented a fringe benefit tax on the allotment of shares pursuant to the exercise or vesting, on or after April 1, 2007, of options and RSUs granted to employees. The fringe benefit tax is payable by the employer at the rate of 33.99% on the difference between the fair market value of the options and RSUs on the date of vesting of the options and RSUs and the exercise price of the options and the purchase price (if any) for the RSUs, as applicable. The government of India has not published its guidelines on how the fair market value of the options and RSUs should be determined. The new legislation permits the employer to recover the fringe benefit tax from the employees. However, we may decide not to recover, or we may be unsuccessful in recovering, the fringe benefit tax from our employees, which would cause our overall expense to increase.

In 2005, the government of India implemented the Special Economic Zone Act, 2005, or SEZ legislation, with the effect that taxable income of new operations established in designated special economic zones, or SEZs, may be eligible for tax exemption equal to (i) 100% of their profits or gains derived for the first five years from the commencement of operations; (ii) 50% of those profits or gains for the next five years; and (iii) 50% of those profits or gains for a further five years, subject to satisfying certain capital investment requirements.

We may establish one or more new operations centers in designated SEZs that would be eligible for the benefits of the SEZ legislation, subject to the receipt of requisite governmental and regulatory approvals. However, the Ministry of Finance in India has expressed concern about the potential loss of tax revenues as a result of the exemptions under the SEZ legislation. The SEZ legislation has been criticized on economic grounds by the International Monetary Fund and may be challenged in courts by certain non-governmental organizations. It is possible that, as a result of such political pressures, the procedure for obtaining the benefits of the SEZ legislation may become more onerous, the types of land eligible for SEZ status may be further restricted or the SEZ legislation may be amended or repealed. Moreover, there is continuing uncertainty as to the governmental and regulatory approvals required to establish operations in the SEZs or to qualify for the tax benefit. This uncertainty may delay our establishment of operations in the SEZs.

Critical Accounting Policies

The discussion and analysis of our financial condition and results of operations are based on our consolidated financial statements included elsewhere in this annual report which have been prepared in accordance with US GAAP. Note 2 to our consolidated financial statements describes our significant accounting policies and is an essential part of our consolidated financial statements.

We believe the following to be critical accounting policies. By “critical accounting policies,” we mean policies that are both important to the portrayal of our financial condition and financial results and require critical management judgments and estimates. Although we believe that our judgments and estimates are appropriate, actual future results may differ from our estimates.

Revenue Recognition

We generate revenue by providing business process outsourcing services to our clients. Business process outsourcing services involve providing back-office administration, data management, contact center management and automobile claims handling services. We recognize revenue when we have persuasive evidence of an arrangement, services have been rendered, the fee is determinable and collectibility is reasonably assured. We conclude that we have persuasive evidence of an arrangement when we enter into an agreement with our clients with terms and conditions that describe the service and the related payments and are legally enforceable. We consider revenue to be determinable when the services have been provided in accordance with the agreement. When the terms of the agreement specify service level parameters that must be met, we monitor such service level parameters and determine if there are any service credits or penalties that we need to account for. Revenue is recognized net of any service credits that are due to a client. A substantial portion of our revenue is from large companies, where we do not believe we have a significant credit risk. We have certain minimum commitment arrangements, whereby the contracts either provide for a minimum revenue commitment on an annual basis or a cumulative basis over multiple years, stated in terms of annual minimum amounts. Where a minimum commitment is specific to an annual period, any revenue shortfall is invoiced and recognized at the end of this period. When the shortfall in a particular year can be offset with revenues received in excess of minimum commitments in a subsequent year, we recognize deferred revenue for the shortfall which has been invoiced and received. To the extent we have sufficient experience to conclude that the shortfall will not be satisfied by excess revenues in a subsequent period, the deferred revenue will be recognized as revenue in that period. In order to determine whether we have sufficient experience, we consider several factors which include (i) the historical volume of business done with a client as compared with initial projections of volume as agreed to by the client and us; (ii) the length of time for which we have such historical experience; (iii) future volume expected based on projections received from the client; and (iv) our internal expectations of the ongoing volume with the client. Otherwise the deferred revenue will remain until such time we can conclude that it will not receive revenues in excess of the minimum commitment. For certain agreements, we have retroactive discounts related to meeting agreed volumes. In such situations, we record revenue at the discounted rate, although we initially bill at the higher rate, unless we can determine that the agreed volumes will not be met.

We invoice our clients depending on the terms of the arrangement, which include billing based on a per employee, per transaction or cost-plus basis. Amounts billed or payments received, where all the conditions for revenue recognition have not been met, are recorded as deferred revenue and are recognized as revenue when all recognition criteria have been met. However, the costs related to the performance of such work are recognized in the period the services are rendered.

Certain contracts allow us to invoice our clients for out-of-pocket expenses incurred to render services to our clients and we recognize such reimbursements as revenue.

We provide automobile claims handling services, which include claims handling and administration, or claims handling, and arranging for repairs with repair centers across the UK and the related payment processing for such repairs, or accident management. With respect to claims handling, we enter into contracts with our clients to process all their claims over the contract period, where the fees are determined either on a per claim basis or is a fixed payment for the contract period. Where our contracts are on a per claim basis, we invoice the client at the inception of the claim process. We estimate the processing period for the claims and recognize revenue over the estimated processing period. In prior years, this processing period generally ranged between two to six months. Since the first quarter of fiscal 2007, we have reduced the processing period to generally range from two to three months. The processing time may be greater for new clients and the estimated service period is adjusted accordingly. The processing period is estimated based on historical experience and other relevant factors, if any. Where the fee is a fixed payment for the contract period, revenue is recognized on a straight line basis over the period of the contract. In certain

cases, the fee is contingent upon the successful recovery of a claim by the client. In these circumstances, the revenue is not recognized until the contingency is resolved.

In order to provide automobile accident management services, we negotiate with and set up a network of repair centers where vehicles involved in an accident can be repaired. We are the principal in these transactions between the repair center and the client. The repair centers bill us for the negotiated costs of the repair and we invoice such costs to the client. We recognize the amounts invoiced to the client as revenue as we have determined that we meet the criteria established by Emerging Issues Task Force Consensus, or EITF, No. 99-19, “Reporting Revenue Gross as a Principal versus Net as an Agent.” Factors considered in determining that we are the principal in the transaction include whether (i) we negotiate the labor rates with repair centers; (ii) we determine which repair center should be used; (iii) we are responsible for timely and satisfactory completion of repairs; and (iv) we bear the credit risk. In certain circumstances, a portion of the repair costs may be insured. In such situations, the payment received from the insurance company is not recognized as revenue or cost of revenue. We invoice the repair center for referral fees and recognize it as revenue.

Business Combinations

Our acquisitions have been accounted under the purchase method of accounting. We identify tangible and intangible assets that we have acquired and estimate the fair values on the date of the acquisition. We determine the fair values of the acquired assets taking into consideration information supplied by the management of the acquired entities, external valuations and other relevant information. We primarily determine the valuations based on an estimate of the future discounted cash flow projections. We also estimate the useful lives of the assets acquired to determine the period over which we will depreciate or amortize the assets. Where there are significant differences between the tax bases and book bases of the assets acquired or liabilities assumed, we also create deferred tax assets or liabilities at the date of the acquisition. The determination of fair values requires significant judgment both by management and by outside specialists engaged to assist in this process. The remainder of the purchase price, if any, is recorded as goodwill.

Goodwill, Intangible Assets and Property and Equipment

We determine reporting units based on our analysis of segments and estimate the goodwill to be allocated to each reporting unit.

The goodwill impairment test is a two-step process, which requires us to make judgments in determining what assumptions to use in the calculation. The first step of the process consists of estimating the fair value of each of our reporting units, based on a discounted cash flow model, using revenue and profit forecasts and comparing those estimated fair values with the carrying values which include the allocated goodwill. If the estimated fair value is less than the carrying value, a second step is performed to compute the amount of the impairment by determining the implied fair value of goodwill. The determination of a reporting unit’s implied fair value of goodwill requires the allocation of the estimated fair value of the reporting unit to the assets and liabilities of the reporting unit. Any unallocated fair value representing the implied fair value of goodwill is then compared to its corresponding carrying value. If the carrying value exceeds the implied fair value of goodwill, the difference is recognized as an impairment charge.

The implied fair value of reporting units is determined by our management and is generally based upon future cash flow projections for the reporting unit, discounted to present value. We consider external valuations when management considers it appropriate to do so.

We amortize intangible assets with definite lives over the estimated useful lives and review them for impairment, if indicators of impairment arise. We estimate the useful lives of intangible assets after consideration of historical results and anticipated results based on our current plans.

We initially record purchased property and equipment, which includes amounts recorded under capital leases, at cost. Advances paid towards the acquisition of property and equipment and the cost of property and equipment not put to use before the balance sheet date are reported under the caption capital work-in-progress. Depreciation and amortization of property and equipment are computed using the straight-line method over the estimated useful lives of the assets. We estimate the useful lives of intangible assets after consideration of historical results and anticipated results based on our current plans.

We perform impairment reviews of intangible assets and property and equipment when events or circumstances indicate that the value of the assets may be impaired. Indicators of impairment include operating or cash flow losses, significant decreases in

market value or changes in the physical condition of the property and equipment. When indicators of impairment are present, the evaluation of impairment is based upon a comparison of the carrying amount of the intangible asset or property and equipment to the estimated future undiscounted net cash flows expected to be generated by the asset. If estimated future undiscounted cash flows are less than the carrying amount of the asset, the asset is considered impaired. The impairment expense is determined by comparing the estimated fair value of the intangible asset or property and equipment to its carrying value, with any shortfall from fair value recognized as an expense in the current period. The estimate of undiscounted cash flows and the fair value of assets require several assumptions and estimates.

We cannot predict the occurrence of future events that might adversely affect the reported value of goodwill, intangible assets or property and equipment. Such events include, but are not limited to, strategic decisions made in response to economic and competitive conditions, the impact of the environment on our customer base, and material negative change in relationship with significant customers.

Income Taxes

We apply the asset and liability method of accounting for income taxes as described in Statement of Financial Accounting Standards, or SFAS, No. 109, “Accounting for Income Taxes.” Under this method, deferred tax assets and liabilities are recognized for future tax consequences attributable to differences between the financial statements carrying amounts of existing assets and liabilities and their respective tax bases and operating loss and tax credit carry-forwards. Deferred tax assets and liabilities are measured using tax rates expected to apply to taxable income in the years in which those temporary differences are expected to be recovered or settled. The effect on deferred tax assets and liabilities of a change in tax rates is recognized in income in the period that includes the enactment date. We recognize valuation allowances to reduce the deferred tax assets to an amount that is more likely than not to be realized. In assessing the likelihood of realization, we consider estimates of future taxable income.

We also evaluate potential exposures related to tax contingencies or claims made by the tax authorities in various jurisdictions and determine if a reserve is required. A reserve is recorded if we believe that a loss is probable and the amount can be reasonably estimated. These reserves are based on estimates and subject to changing facts and circumstances considering the progress of ongoing audits, case law and new legislation. We believe that the reserves established are adequate in relation to the potential for any additional tax assessments.

Results of Operations

The following table sets forth certain financial information as a percentage of revenue and revenue less repair payments:

		Revenue												Revenue Less Repair Payments
		Year Ended March 31,												Year Ended March 31,
		2007				2006				2005				2007				2006				2005
														Unaudited				Unaudited				Unaudited
Cost of revenue			77.0	%			71.9	%			86.5	%			63.1	%			61.4	%			77.9	%
Gross profit			23.0	%			28.1	%			13.5	%			36.9	%			38.6	%			22.1	%
Operating expenses:
SG&A			14.9	%			17.9	%			15.3	%			23.9	%			24.6	%			25.1	%
Amortization of intangibles assets			0.5	%			0.4	%			0.9	%			0.9	%			0.6	%			1.4	%
Operating income (loss)			7.6	%			9.8	%			(2.7	)%			12.1	%			13.4	%			(4.4	)%
Non-operating income (loss)			0.7	%			0.0	%			(0.2	)%			1.1	%			0.0	%			(0.3	)%
Provision for income taxes			(0.7	)%			(0.8	)%			(0.7	)%			(1.2	)%			(1.1	)%			(1.1	)%
Net income (loss)			7.6	%			9.0	%			(3.6	)%			12.0	%			12.3	%			(5.8	)%

The following table reconciles revenue (a GAAP measure) to revenue less repair payments (a non-GAAP measure) across our business:

		Year Ended March 31,
		2007				2006				2005
Revenue			100.0	%			100.0	%			100.0	%
Less: Payments to repair centers			37.6	%			27.1	%			39.0	%
Revenue less repair payments			62.4	%			72.9	%			61.0	%

Fiscal 2007 Compared to Fiscal 2006

Revenue. Revenue in fiscal 2007 was $352.3 million, an increase of 73.7% over revenue of $202.8 million in fiscal 2006. This increase in revenue of $149.5 million was primarily attributable to an increase in revenue from existing clients of $76.6 million on account of an expansion of the number of processes that we executed for these clients and an increase in volumes for the existing processes. The increase in revenue from new clients was $72.9 million. Revenue from the UK, Europe (excluding the UK) and North America (primarily the US) accounted for $189.9 million, $79.0 million and $80.8 million, respectively, of our revenue for fiscal 2007, representing an increase of 49.6%, 210.8% and 64.4%, respectively, from fiscal 2006.

Revenue Less Repair Payments. Revenue less repair payments in fiscal 2007 was $219.7 million, an increase of 48.5% over our revenue less repair payments of $147.9 million in fiscal 2006. This increase in revenue less repair payments of $71.8 million was primarily attributable to an increase in revenue less repair payments from existing clients of $50.3 million on account of an expansion of the number of processes that we executed for these clients and an increase in volumes for the existing processes. The increase in revenue less repair payments from new clients was $21.5 million. Contract prices across the various types of processes remained substantially stable over this period. Revenue less repair payments from the UK, Europe (excluding the UK) and North America (primarily the US) accounted for $110.9 million, $25.3 million and $80.8 million, respectively, of our revenue in fiscal 2007, representing increases of 51.3%, 5.0% and 64.4%, respectively, from fiscal 2006. We realized increases in revenue less repair payments across each of our business units in fiscal 2007, most significantly in our emerging businesses unit, followed by our BFSI business unit and to a lesser degree, in our travel business unit.

Cost of Revenue. Cost of revenue in fiscal 2007 was 77.0% of revenue as compared to 71.9% of revenue in fiscal 2006. Cost of revenue in fiscal 2007 was $271.2 million, an increase of 86.1% over our cost of revenue of $145.7 million in fiscal 2006. Payments made to repair centers increased by $77.7 million to $132.6 million in fiscal 2007 from $54.9 million in fiscal 2006 due to the addition of a new client and increased business from existing clients. Operating employee costs increased by $26.9 million and travel costs increased by $2.7 million over this period due to an increase in headcount. In addition, infrastructure costs increased by $18.1 million due to the opening of two new delivery centers, one each in Pune and Mumbai and the expansion of existing centers. Share-based compensation costs included in operating employee compensation increased by $0.9 million in fiscal 2007 as compared to fiscal 2006.

Gross Profit. Gross profit in fiscal 2007 was $81.1 million, or 23.0% of revenue, as compared to $57.1 million, or 28.1% of revenue, in fiscal 2006. Gross profit as a percentage of revenue less repair payments was 36.9% in fiscal 2007 compared to 38.6% in fiscal 2006. Gross profit as a percentage of revenue less repair payments decreased by approximately 1.7% in fiscal 2007 as compared to fiscal 2006 primarily on account of $2.4 million of revenue recognized during fiscal 2006 that had been deferred from fiscal 2005 and higher employee costs and infrastructure costs.

SG&A Expenses. SG&A expenses in fiscal 2007 were $52.5 million, an increase of 44.3% over our SG&A expenses of $36.3 million in fiscal 2006. Non-operating employee compensation and related travel expenses were higher by $9.1 million largely on account of our increased marketing efforts and the expansion of our management team. Share-based compensation costs included in non-operating employee compensation increased by $0.9 million in fiscal 2007 as compared to fiscal 2006. Other SG&A cost elements such as facilities costs, professional fees and depreciation increased by $7.0 million in fiscal 2007 as compared to fiscal 2006. SG&A expenses as a percentage of revenue were 14.9% in fiscal 2007 compared to 17.9% in fiscal 2006. SG&A expenses as a percentage of revenue less repair payments were 23.9% in fiscal 2007 compared to 24.6% in fiscal 2006, as our revenue less repair payments grew more rapidly than our SG&A expenses.

Amortization of Intangible Assets. Amortization of intangible assets was $1.9 million in fiscal 2007, an increase of 121.5% over $0.9 million in fiscal 2006. The increase was primarily on account of intangible assets acquired through our acquisition of Trinity Partners in November 2005.

Operating Income. Income from operations in fiscal 2007 was $26.8 million compared to $19.9 million in fiscal 2006, due to the reasons discussed above. Income from operations as a percentage of revenue was 7.6% in fiscal 2007 as compared to 9.8% in fiscal 2006. Income from operations as a percentage of revenue less repair payments was 12.1% in fiscal 2007 as compared to

13.4% in fiscal 2006. We had recognized $2.4 million of revenue during fiscal 2006 that had been deferred from fiscal 2005, as all revenue recognition criteria had not been met at the end of fiscal 2005.

Other Income Net. Other income, net in fiscal 2007 was $2.5 million as compared to $0.5 million in fiscal 2006, an increase of $2.0 million, primarily on account of interest income earned on our net proceeds from our initial public offering which are held in term deposits and demand deposits. Interest income was $3.5 million in fiscal 2007 as compared to $0.4 million in fiscal 2006. The increase in income was partially offset by foreign exchange loss. We recorded a foreign exchange loss of $1.4 million in fiscal 2007 as compared to a foreign exchange loss of $0.4 million in fiscal 2006.

Interest Expense. Interest expense in fiscal 2007 was $0.1 million, a decrease from $0.4 million in fiscal 2006.

Provision for Income Taxes. Provision for income taxes in fiscal 2007 was $2.6 million, an increase of 63.5% over our provision for income taxes of $1.6 million in fiscal 2006. Tax as a percentage of net income before tax was 8.8% in fiscal 2007 as compared to 7.9% in fiscal 2006.

Net Income. Net income in fiscal 2007 was $26.6 million compared to $18.3 million in fiscal 2006. Net margins were 7.5% in fiscal 2007 as compared to 9.0% in fiscal 2006. Net margins as percentage of revenue less repair payments were 12.1% in fiscal 2007 as compared to 12.3% in fiscal 2006.

Fiscal 2006 Compared to Fiscal 2005

Revenue. Revenue in fiscal 2006 was $202.8 million, an increase of 25.1% over revenue of $162.2 million in fiscal 2005. This increase in revenue of $40.6 million was primarily attributable to an increase in revenue from existing clients of $30.4 million on account of an expansion of the number of processes that we executed for these clients and an increase in volumes for the existing processes. The increase in revenue from new clients was $10.2 million, including an increase of $6.0 million attributable to the acquisition of Trinity Partners during the fiscal year. We also experienced a higher percentage growth in revenue from North American clients due to our increased investment in our salesforce in North America. Revenue from the UK, Europe (excluding the UK) and North America (primarily the US) accounted for $126.9 million, $25.4 million and $49.1 million, respectively, of our revenue for fiscal 2006, representing increase (decrease) of 20.2%, (8.3)% and 75.5%, respectively, from fiscal 2005.

Revenue Less Repair Payments. Revenue less repair payments in fiscal 2006 was $147.9 million, an increase of 49.4% over our revenue less repair payments of $99.0 million in fiscal 2005. This increase in revenue less repair payments of $48.9 million was primarily attributable to an increase in revenue less repair payments from existing clients of $39.2 million on account of an expansion of the number of processes that we executed for these clients and an increase in volumes for the existing processes. The increase in revenue less repair payments from new clients was $9.7 million, including an increase of $6.0 million that was attributable to the acquisition of Trinity Partners during the fiscal year. Contract prices across the various types of processes remained stable over this period. We realized increases in revenue less repair payments across each of our business units in fiscal 2006. Revenue less repair payments from the UK, Europe (excluding the UK) and North America (primarily the US) accounted for $73.3 million, $24.1 million and $49.1 million, respectively, of our revenue in fiscal 2006, representing increases of 43.7%, 26.3% and 75.5%, respectively, from fiscal 2005.

Cost of Revenue. Cost of revenue in fiscal 2006 was 71.9% of revenue as compared to 86.5% of revenue in fiscal 2005. Cost of revenue in fiscal 2006 was $145.7 million, an increase of 3.9% over our cost of revenue of $140.3 million in fiscal 2005. Employee costs increased by $20.1 million and travel costs increased by $3.4 million over this period due to an increase in headcount. In addition, infrastructure costs increased by $9.4 million due to the opening of two new operating centers, one each in Gurgaon and Nashik, and the expansion of existing centers. These increases were offset in part by a decline in payments made to repair centers, from $63.2 million in fiscal 2005 to $54.9 million in fiscal 2006. In addition, our cost of revenue in fiscal 2005 included a $19.2 million payment for client resources located in North America that we bore while transferring this client’s processes to our offshore delivery centers (see “ — Overview — Expenses — Cost of Revenue”). Further, included in the cost of revenue in fiscal 2006 was $3.2 million relating to Trinity Partners.

Gross Profit. Gross profit in fiscal 2006 was $57.1 million, or 28.1% of revenue, as compared to $21.9 million, or 13.5% of revenue, in fiscal 2005. Gross profit as a percentage of revenue less repair payments was 38.6% in fiscal 2006 compared to 22.1% in fiscal 2005. The lower gross profit in fiscal 2005 was due to the payment for client resources in North America during the transfer period described above. We also recognized $2.4 million of revenue during fiscal 2006 that had been deferred from fiscal 2005, as all revenue recognition criteria had not been met at the end of fiscal 2005.

SG&A Expenses. SG&A expenses in fiscal 2006 were $36.3 million, an increase of 46.0% over our SG&A expenses of $24.9 million in fiscal 2005. Non-operating employee compensation and related travel expenses were higher by $5.4 million largely on account of our increased marketing efforts in North America and the expansion of our management team. Share-based compensation costs included in non-operating employee compensation increased by $1.6 million in fiscal 2006 as compared to fiscal 2005. Other SG&A cost elements such as facilities costs, professional fees and depreciation increased by $6.0 million in fiscal 2006 as compared to fiscal 2005. SG&A expenses as a percentage of revenue were 17.9% in fiscal 2006 compared to 15.3% in fiscal 2005. SG&A expenses as a percentage of revenue less repair payments were 24.6% in fiscal 2006 compared to 25.1% in fiscal 2005, as our revenue less repair payments grew more rapidly than our SG&A expenses.

Amortization of Intangible Assets. Amortization of intangible assets was $0.9 million in fiscal 2006, a decrease of 39.5% over $1.4 million in fiscal 2005. The decrease was on account of intangible assets acquired through our acquisition of Town & Country Assistance Limited in fiscal 2003, the majority of which were amortized through fiscal 2005 offset in part by the amortization related to intangible assets of $0.7 million from our acquisition of Trinity Partners in fiscal 2006.

Operating Income (Loss). Income from operations in fiscal 2006 was $19.9 million compared to a loss from operations of $(4.4) million in fiscal 2005, due to the reasons discussed above. Income from operations as a percentage of revenue was 9.8% in fiscal 2006, compared to a loss from operations as a percentage of revenue of (2.7)% in fiscal 2005. Income from operations as a percentage of revenue less repair payments was 13.4% in fiscal 2006, compared to a loss from operations as a percentage of revenue less repair payments of (4.4)% in fiscal 2005.

Other Income, Net. Other income, net in fiscal 2006 was $0.5 million, an increase from $0.2 million in fiscal 2005.

Interest Expense. Interest expense in fiscal 2006 was $0.4 million, a decrease from $0.5 million in fiscal 2005.

Provision for Income Taxes. Provision for income taxes in fiscal 2006 was $1.6 million, an increase of 47.4% over our provision for income taxes of $1.1 million in fiscal 2005, due to an increase of $0.9 million in taxes paid in the UK related to our auto claims business and a decrease of $0.4 million in the rest of our business in fiscal 2006.

Net Income (Loss). Net income in fiscal 2006 was $18.3 million compared to a net loss of $(5.8) million in fiscal 2005. We had a net income in fiscal 2006 as compared to a net loss in fiscal 2005 due to our revenue growth, as well as the lower cost of onshore client resources as described above. Net margins were 9.0% in fiscal 2006 as compared to (3.6)% in fiscal 2005. Net margins as a percentage of revenue less repair payments were 12.3% in fiscal 2006 as compared to (5.8)% in fiscal 2005.

Results by Reportable Segment

For purposes of evaluating operating performance and allocating resources, we have organized our company by operating segments. See Note 14 of the notes to our consolidated financial statements included elsewhere in this annual report. For financial statement reporting purposes, we aggregate the segments that meet the criteria for aggregation as set forth in SFAS No. 131, “Disclosures about Segments of an Enterprise and Related Information,” or SFAS No. 131. We have separately reported our auto claims segment (or WNS Assistance), as it does not meet the aggregation criteria under SFAS No. 131. Accordingly, pursuant to SFAS No. 131, we have two reportable segments: WNS Global BPO and WNS Auto Claims BPO.

WNS Global BPO is primarily delivered out of our offshore delivery centers in India and Sri Lanka. This segment includes all of our business activities with the exception of WNS Auto Claims BPO. WNS Auto Claims BPO is our automobile claims management business called WNS Assistance, which is primarily based in the UK and is part of our BFSI business unit. See “Item 4. Information on the Company — B. Business Overview — Business Process Outsourcing Service Offerings.” We report WNS Auto Claims BPO as a separate segment for financial statement reporting purposes since a substantial part of our reported revenue in this business consists of amounts invoiced to our clients for payments made by us to automobile repair centers, resulting in lower long-term gross margins when measured on the basis of revenue, relative to the WNS Global BPO segment.

Amounts we invoice our clients for the automobile repair costs that we pay to repair centers is recognized as revenue because we act as principal in our dealings with the repair centers and our clients in our WNS Auto Claims BPO business. We are responsible for the repairs, including determining the repair center to be used and negotiating labor rates with such repair centers. We also bear the credit risk of recovery of these payments from our clients beyond certain advance payments from our clients. However, since we wholly subcontract the repairs to the repair centers, we evaluate our business performance based on our revenue net of these payments to repair centers, which we call revenue less repair payments. Though a non-GAAP measure, we believe that

revenue less repair payments reflects more accurately the value of our services to our clients, and we use revenue less repair payments as the primary measure to allocate resources and evaluate segmental performance. We also use segment operating income (loss), which is defined as segment income (loss) before unallocated costs, as a secondary measure to evaluate segment performance during a period. Operating margins in our WNS Auto Claims BPO segment, when calculated on the basis of revenue less repair payments, are comparable to operating margins in our WNS Global BPO segment.

Our management allocates resources based on segment revenue less repair payments and measures segment performance based on revenue less repair payments and to a lesser extent on segment operating income. The accounting policies of our reportable segments are the same as those of our company. See “— Critical Accounting Policies.” We may in the future change our reportable segments based on how our business evolves.

The following table shows revenue and revenue less repair payments for our two reportable segments for the periods indicated:

		Year Ended March 31, 2007								Year Ended March 31, 2006								Year Ended March 31, 2005
		WNS Global				WNS Auto				WNS Global				WNS Auto				WNS Global				WNS Auto
		BPO				Claims BPO				BPO				Claims BPO				BPO				Claims BPO
		(US dollars in millions)
Segment revenue(1)		$	195.0			$	158.8			$	125.2			$	79.6			$	78.6			$	85.2
Less: Payments to repair centers			—				132.6				—				54.9				—				63.2
Revenue less repair payments(1)			195.0				26.2				125.2				24.7				78.6				22.0
Depreciation			12.8				2.0				8.7				1.8				6.9				1.5
Other costs			154.9				19.1				99.0				17.8				77.8				17.1
Segment operating income (loss)		$	27.3			$	5.1			$	17.5			$	5.1			$	(6.1	)		$	3.4

In fiscal 2007, WNS Global BPO accounted for 54.9% of our revenue and 88.1% of our revenue less repair payments, compared to 60.8% of our revenue and 83.3% of our revenue less repair payments in fiscal 2006.

WNS Global BPO

Segment Revenue. Revenue in the WNS Global BPO segment increased by 55.7% to $195.0 million in fiscal 2007 from $125.2 million in fiscal 2006. Revenue in this segment increased by 59.3% to $125.2 million in fiscal 2006 from $78.6 million in fiscal 2005. Increases during both these periods were primarily driven by an increase in the volume of transactions executed for existing clients and an increase in revenue from new clients. Contract prices across the various types of processes remained substantially stable over these periods.

Segment Operating Income (Loss). Segment operating income in the WNS Global BPO segment increased by 55.7% to $27.3 million in fiscal 2007 from an operating income of $17.5 million in fiscal 2006. This change was primarily attributable to increased revenues. Segment operating income increased to $17.5 million in fiscal 2006 from a segment operating loss of $6.1 million in fiscal 2005. This change was primarily attributable to the impact of our bearing the cost of client resources in North America of $19.2 million in fiscal 2005, as explained above (see “— Overview — Expenses — Cost of Revenue”). Segment operating margin for fiscal 2007 remained unchanged at 14.0% of revenue as compared to fiscal 2006.

WNS Auto Claims BPO

Segment Revenue. Revenue in the WNS Auto Claims BPO segment increased by 99.5% to $158.8 million in fiscal 2007 from $79.6 million in fiscal 2006, primarily due to the addition of a significant new client and the assumption of the role as principal in our dealings with third party repair centers for our accident management services for an existing significant client. Payments made to repair centers in fiscal 2007 were $132.6 million, an increase of 141.5% from $54.9 million in fiscal 2006. This was primarily due to the addition of a significant new client and our assumption of the role as principal in our dealings with third party repair centers for accident management services for an existing significant client. Revenue less repair payments in this segment increased by 6.1% to $26.2 million in fiscal 2007 from $24.7 million in fiscal 2006, due to the addition of a significant new client. Revenue in this segment decreased by 6.6% to $79.6 million in fiscal 2006 from $85.2 million in fiscal 2005. Payments made to repair centers in fiscal 2006 were $54.9 million, a decrease of 13.1% from $63.2 million in fiscal 2005. This was primarily due to a loss of a significant client. Revenue less repair payments in this segment increased by 12.2% to $24.7 million in fiscal 2006 from $22.0 million in fiscal 2005, driven by the growth in new claims processing clients as well as continued increases in claims processed on behalf of our existing clients. Contract prices across the various types of processes remained substantially stable over these periods.

Segment Operating Income. Segment operating income decreased by 1.4% to $5.07 million in fiscal 2007 from $5.14 million in fiscal 2006. Segment operating income as a percentage of revenue less repair payments was 19.4% in fiscal 2007 as compared to 20.8% in fiscal 2006. This decrease of 1.4% was mainly on account of a ramp up for a significant customer. As claims management revenue is recognized over the period that claims are processed, a portion of such revenue is deferred at the end of a period. Our processing period was two to six months. Since the first quarter of fiscal 2007, we have reduced the processing period to generally range from two to three months. Claims management revenue deferred at March 31, 2006 was higher than claims management revenue deferred at March 31, 2007 by $0.2 million. Segmental operating income increased by 53.4% to $5.1 million in fiscal 2006 from $3.3 million in fiscal 2005. The increase of $1.8 million was due to a 12.2% increase in revenue less repair payments in fiscal 2006. Claims management revenue deferred at March 31, 2005 was higher than claims management revenue deferred at March 31, 2006 by $1.7 million.

Quarterly Results

The following table presents unaudited quarterly financial information for each of our last eight fiscal quarters on a historical basis. We believe the quarterly information contains all adjustments necessary to fairly present this information.. As a business process outsourcing services provider, we anticipate and respond to demand from our clients. Accordingly, we have limited control over the timing and circumstances under which our services are provided. Typically, we show a decrease in our first-quarter margins as a result of salary increases. For these and other reasons, we can experience variability in our operating results from quarter to quarter. The operating results for any quarter are not necessarily indicative of the results for any future period.

		Fiscal 2007																Fiscal 2006
		Three Months Ended																Three Months Ended
		Mar 2007				Dec 2006				Sep 2006				Jun 2006				Mar 2006(1)				Dec 2005(1)				Sep 2005				Jun 2005
		(US dollars in millions)
Revenue		$	110.7			$	102.0			$	86.6			$	53.0			$	52.9			$	49.8	(2)		$	48.9			$	51.2	(2)
Cost of revenue			85.2				81.3				67.3				37.4				37.3				34.1				35.6				38.7
Gross profit			25.5				20.7				19.3				15.6				15.6				15.7				13.4				12.4
Operating expenses:
SG&A			16.3				14.0				12.1				10.1				11.4	(3)			9.7	(4)			8.2				7.1
Amortization of intangibles assets			0.5				0.5				0.5				0.5				0.5				0.2				0.1				0.1
Operating income			8.7				6.2				6.7				5.0				3.7	(3)			5.8	(4)			5.1				5.3
Non-operating income (loss)			1.3				1.3				(0.1	)			(0.1	)			0.2				(0.0	)			(0.1	)			(0.1	)
(Provision) benefit for income taxes			(1.2	)			(0.5	)			(0.6	)			(0.3	)			(0.3	)			0.1				(0.5	)			(0.9	)
Net income			8.8				7.0				6.0				4.6				3.7				5.9				4.4				4.4

The following table sets forth for the periods indicated selected consolidated financial data:

		Fiscal 2007																Fiscal 2006
		Three Months Ended																Three Months Ended
		Mar 2007				Dec 2006				Sep 2006				Jun 2006				Mar 2006(1)				Dec 2005(1)				Sep 2005				Jun 2005
Gross profit as a percentage of revenue			23.1	%			20.3	%			22.2	%			29.4	%			29.5	%			31.5	%			27.3	%			24.3	%
Operating income as a percentage of revenue			7.9	%			6.2	%			7.7	%			9.4	%			7.0	%			11.6	%			10.4	%			10.4	%
Gross profit as a percentage of revenue less repair payments			39.8	%			36.3	%			36.4	%			34.3	%			37.6	%			40.8	%			38.4	%			37.5	%
Operating income as a percentage of revenue less repair payments			13.7	%			11.0	%			12.6	%			11.0	%			9.0	%			15.0	%			14.6	%			16.0	%

The following table reconciles our revenue (a GAAP measure) to revenue less repair payments (a non-GAAP measure):

		Fiscal 2007																Fiscal 2006
		Three Months Ended																Three Months Ended
		Mar 2007				Dec 2006				Sep 2006				Jun 2006				Mar 2006(1)				Dec 2005(1)				Sep 2005				Jun 2005
		(US dollars in millions)
Revenue		$	110.7			$	102.0			$	86.6			$	53.0			$	52.9			$	49.8	(2)		$	48.9			$	51.2	(2)
Less: Payments to repair centers			46.7				44.8				33.6				7.5				11.5				11.3				14.1				18.0
Revenue less repair payments		$	64.0			$	57.2			$	53.0			$	45.5				41.4			$	38.4	(2)		$	34.8			$	33.2	(2)

Contractual Obligations

Our principal commitments consist of obligations under operating leases for office space, which represent minimum lease payments for office space, purchase obligations for property and equipment and capital leases for computers. We have no ongoing commercial commitments, such as drawn lines of credit, guarantees or standby purchase orders that would affect our liquidity over the next five years. The following table sets out our total future contractual obligations as of March 31, 2007 on a consolidated basis:

		Payments due by period
						Less than												More than
		Total				1 Year				2-3 Years				4-5 Years				5 Years
		(US dollars in thousands)
Operating leases		$	43,720			$	10,815			$	17,338			$	12,079			$	3,488
Purchase obligations			1,964				1,964				—				—				—
Capital lease obligations		$	13				11				2				—				—
Total		$	45,697			$	12,790			$	17,340			$	12,079			$	3,488

Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements

We have no off-balance sheet arrangements or obligations.

Liquidity and Capital Resources

Historically, our sources of funding have principally been from cash flow from operations supplemented by equity and short-term debt financing as required. Our capital requirements have principally been for the establishment of operations facilities to support our growth and acquisitions.

During fiscal 2007 and 2006, our net income was $26.6 million and $18.3 million, respectively. By implementing our growth strategy (see “Item 4. Information on the Company — B. Business Overview — Business Strategy”), we intend to generate higher revenue in the future in an effort to maintain our profitable position.

As of March 31, 2007, we had cash and cash equivalents of $112.3 million. We typically seek to invest our available cash on hand in bank deposits or short-term money market accounts. As of fiscal 2007, we had an unused line of credit of Rs. 370 million ($8.5 million) from Hong Kong and Shanghai Banking Corporation, Mumbai Branch.

We completed the acquisition of Marketics in May 2007. The consideration for the acquisition is an initial payment of $30 million and a contingent earn-out consideration of up to $35 million to be calculated based on the performance and results of operations of Marketics for its fiscal year ending March 31, 2008 payable in July 2008. 75.1% of the share capital of Marketics has been transferred to us and the remaining 24.9% of the share capital of Marketics is held in an escrow account and will be transferred to us upon payment of the contingent earn-out consideration. We paid the initial $30 million payment from our cash and cash equivalents (including the net proceeds to us from our initial public offering) in May 2007, of which $2.5 million is being held in escrow to be paid out to the selling shareholders along with the contingent earn-out consideration payable on or around July 15, 2008. We intend to pay the earn-out consideration from our cash and cash equivalents (including the remaining net proceeds to us from our initial public offering). We will consolidate 100% of the results of operation of Marketics from May 1, 2007.

We completed the acquisition of Flovate on June 11, 2007. We paid £3,252,000 in cash and have deposited an additional retention amount of £700,000 into an escrow account. The amount deposited in the escrow account will be payable to the selling shareholders on June 11, 2008, subject to certain performance conditions being satisfied by the selling shareholders, and after deducting any amount required to be reimbursed to us by the selling shareholders for expenditures borne by us in connection with the performance of certain post completion projects under the agreement and any amount for which Flovate is liable in respect of any claim made against Flovate of which liability is admitted or which has been finally adjudicated by a court against Flovate prior to June 11, 2008.

Cash Flows from Operating Activities

Cash flows provided by operating activities were $39.3 million for fiscal 2007 and $34.8 million for fiscal 2006. The increase in cash flows from operating activities in fiscal 2007 as compared to fiscal 2006 was attributable to an increase in profits by $8.3 million and an increase in non-cash expenditures, primarily depreciation and stock-based compensation, by $3.7 million. This increase was partially offset by an increase of $7.5 million in working capital.

Cash flows provided by operating activities were $34.8 million for fiscal 2006 and $1.8 million for fiscal 2005. The increase in cash flows from operating activities in fiscal 2006 as compared to fiscal 2005 was attributable to an increased revenue as well as the completion of payment for client resources in North America associated with one significant client contract in fiscal 2005.

Cash Flows from Investing Activities

Cash flows used in investing activities were $38.6 million in fiscal 2007 as compared with $18.7 million used in fiscal 2006. The increase in cash flows used in investing activities in fiscal 2007 from fiscal 2006 was primarily attributable to an increase in capital expenditures by $12.6 million, the placement of $12.0 million in bank deposits, cash payments aggregating $0.9 million as part of the purchase consideration for the acquisition of the fare audit services business of PRG Airline Services Limited,

which is partially offset by the receipt of proceeds from the sale of computers and office equipment of $1.8 million. The increased capital expenditures in fiscal 2007 was primarily for leasehold improvements, purchase of computers, furniture and other office equipment associated with expanding the capacity of our delivery centers. Cash flows used in investing activities in fiscal 2006 included a cash payment of $3.9 million towards the acquisition of Trinity Partners.

Cash flows used in investing activities were $18.7 million for fiscal 2006 and $18.3 million for fiscal 2005. The increase in cash flows used in investing activities in fiscal 2006 from fiscal 2005 was primarily attributable to an acquisition on November 16, 2005, in which we made a cash payment of $3.9 million, net of cash acquired, as part of the purchase consideration for the acquisition of Trinity Partners. This was offset by lower capital expenditures of $14.9 million in fiscal 2006 as compared with $18.3 million in fiscal 2005. These capital expenditures were incurred primarily for leasehold improvements, purchase of computers, furniture, fixtures and other office equipment associated with expanding the capacity of our delivery centers.

Cash Flows from Financing Activities

Cash inflow from financing activities were $91.0 million in the fiscal 2007 as compared with cash outflow of $6.4 million in fiscal 2006 primarily because of the receipt of our net proceeds from our initial public offering in July 2006 of $78.8 million and an increase in proceeds received from the exercise of employee stock options by $2.7 million. In accordance with SFAS No. 123(R), we classified excess tax benefits from share-based compensation expense of $5.7 million as cash flows from financing activities rather than cash flows from operating activities for the fiscal 2007. We repaid a loan of $10.0 million in fiscal 2006.

Cash outflows from financing activities were $6.4 million in fiscal 2006 as compared with cash inflows from financing activities of $10.2 million in fiscal 2005 primarily because of a $9.9 million loan (net proceeds) we received from a significant client in fiscal 2005, which was fully repaid in fiscal 2006. We also received $3.9 million from the issue of shares upon the exercise of options and the sale of shares to a director during fiscal 2006 as compared with $0.7 million received from the issue of shares in fiscal 2005.

We believe that our cash flow from operating activities will be sufficient to meet our estimated capital expenditures, working capital and other cash needs until at least March 31, 2008, the end of fiscal 2008.

Our business strategy requires us to continuously expand our delivery capabilities. We expect to incur capital expenditures on setting up new delivery centers or expanding existing delivery centers and setting up related technology to enable offshore execution and management of clients’ business processes. We expect our capital expenditures needs in fiscal 2008 to be approximately $36 million, which includes $12.3 million for updating technology and processes. We expect to meet this estimated capital expenditures from cash generated from operating activities and our net proceeds from our initial public offering.

We may in the future consider making acquisitions which we expect to be able to finance partly or fully from cash generated from operating activities. If we have significant growth through acquisitions or require additional operating facilities beyond those currently planned to service new client contracts, we may need to obtain further financing. We cannot assure you that additional financing, if needed, will be available on favorable terms or at all.

Recently Issued Accounting Standards

In June 2006, the FASB issued Interpretation No. 48, or FIN 48, “Accounting for Uncertainty in Income Taxes,” an interpretation of SFAS No. 109, “Accounting for Income Taxes,” to create a single model to address accounting for uncertainty in tax positions. FIN 48 clarifies the accounting for income taxes by prescribing a minimum recognition threshold that a tax position is required to meet before being recognized in the financial statements. FIN 48 also provides guidance on de-recognition, measurement, classification, interest and penalties, accounting in interim periods, disclosure and transition. FIN 48 is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2006. We will adopt FIN 48 for fiscal 2008 commencing on April 1, 2007, as required, and the provisions of FIN 48 will be applied to our tax positions with the cumulative effect of the change in accounting principle recognized as an adjustment to opening retained earnings. We are currently evaluating the impact of FIN 48 on our consolidated financial statements.

In September 2006, the FASB issued SFAS No. 157, “Fair Value Measurements.” SFAS No. 157 defines “fair value” as the price that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date. SFAS No. 157 provides guidance for the determination of fair value, and establishes a fair value hierarchy

for assessing the sources of information used in fair value measurements. SFAS No. 157 is effective for fiscal years beginning after November 15, 2007. We are currently evaluating the impact of this pronouncement on our consolidated financial statements.

In February 2007, the FASB issued SFAS No. 159, “The Fair Value Option for Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities” which permits entities to choose to measure many financial instruments and certain other items at fair value that are not currently required to be measured at fair value. SFAS No. 159 will be effective for us on April 1, 2008.

ITEM 6. DIRECTORS, SENIOR MANAGEMENT AND EMPLOYEES

A. Directors and Senior Management

Our board of directors consists of eight directors.

The following table sets forth the name, age (as of May 31, 2007) and position of each of our directors and executive officers as of the date hereof.

Name		Age				Designation
Directors
Ramesh N. Shah(1)			58			Chairman of the Board
Neeraj Bhargava			43			Co-Founder of WNS (Holdings) Limited, Director and Group Chief Executive Officer
Jeremy Young(2)			41			Director
Guy Sochovsky(3)			31			Director
Eric B. Herr(2)(4)(5)			59			Director
Deepak S. Parekh(3)(5)(6)			62			Director
Richard O. Bernays(2)(3)(5)(7)			64			Director
Anthony Armitage Greener(8)			67			Director
Executive Officers(9)
Zubin Dubash			47			Group Chief Financial Officer
Alan Stephen Dunning			50			Co-Founder of WNS (Holdings) Limited, Managing Director of WNS UK
Anup Gupta			35			Chief Executive Officer — Travel Services
Bernard Donoghue(10)			48			Chief Executive Officer — WNS Assistance
J.J. Selvadurai			48			Chief Executive Officer — Enterprise Services
Anish Nanavaty			39			Chief Executive Officer — Knowledge Services
Arjun Singh			46			Chief Executive Officer — BFSI

Summarized below is relevant biographical information covering at least the past five years for each of our directors, executive officers and other managers.

Directors

Ramesh N. Shah is our Chairman and was appointed to our board of directors in July 2005. Mr. Shah is based in New York. In addition to his role as Chairman of the Board, he mentors our North American sales team and manages key external stakeholder relationships. He was also the interim chief executive officer of our BFSI business unit (excluding WNS Assistance) prior to Mr. Arjun Singh’s appointment as the chief executive officer of our BFSI business unit in November 2006. Prior to WNS, he was the chief executive officer for the Retail Banking division at GreenPoint Bank and has held senior positions at American Express, Shearson and Natwest. Mr. Shah received a Master of Business Administration from Columbia University and a Bachelor of Arts degree from Bates College. The business address for Mr. Shah is 420 Lexington Avenue, Suite 2515, New York, New York 10170, USA.

Neeraj Bhargava is a co-founder of WNS (Holdings) Limited and Group Chief Executive Officer and was appointed to our board of directors in May 2004. Mr. Bhargava is based in Mumbai, India. Mr. Bhargava’s responsibilities as Chief Executive Officer include executing our business strategy and managing the overall performance and growth of our organization. Mr. Bhargava co-founded WNS (Holdings) Limited in 2002 and served as the President and Group Chief Financial Officer before becoming our Group Chief Executive Officer in May 2004. Mr. Bhargava received a Master of Business Administration from the Stern School of Business, New York University, and a Bachelor of Arts degree in Economics from St. Stephen’s College, Delhi University. The business address for Mr. Bhargava is Gate 4, Godrej & Boyce Complex, Pirojshanagar, Vikhroli West, Mumbai 400 079, India.

Jeremy Young was appointed to our board of directors as a nominee of Warburg Pincus in May 2004. Mr. Young held various positions at Baxter Healthcare International, Booz, Allen & Hamilton International and Cellular Transplant/ Cytotherapeutics before he joined Warburg Pincus in 1992. He received a Master of Arts degree in English from Cambridge University and a Master of Business Administration from Harvard Business School. He focuses on business services and is also a director of Fibernet Communications, Warburg Pincus Roaming II S.A and e-Verger Limited. The business address for Mr. Young is Warburg Pincus International LLC, Almack House, 28 King Street, St. James, London, SW1Y 6QW, England.

Guy Sochovsky was appointed to our board of directors as a nominee of Warburg Pincus in January 2006. Mr. Sochovsky joined Warburg Pincus in February 2000 and focuses on business services investments. Prior to joining Warburg Pincus, Mr. Sochovsky was with Goldman Sachs in London. He received a Bachelor of Arts, Honors degree in Modern History from Oxford University in 1997. Mr. Sochovsky is also a director of Warburg Pincus Roaming II S.A. The business address for Mr. Sochovsky is Warburg Pincus International LLC, Almack House, 28 King Street, St. James, London, SW1Y 6QW, England.

Eric B. Herr was appointed to our board of directors in July 2006. Mr. Herr is based in the United States. He currently serves as the Chairman of the board of directors for Workscape Inc. (since 2005) and on the board of directors of Taleo Corporation (since 2002). He also serves as the Chairman of the audit committee of Taleo Corporation. Previously, Mr. Herr served as Chief Financial Officer of Autodesk, Inc. (1992 to 1997). Mr. Herr received a Master of Arts degree in Economics from Indiana University and a Bachelor of Arts degree in Economics from Kenyon College. The business address for Mr. Herr is P.O. Box 719, Bristol, NH 03222, USA.

Deepak S. Parekh was appointed to our board of directors in July 2006. Mr. Parekh is based in Mumbai, India. He currently serves as the Chairman (since 1993) and Chief Executive Officer of Housing Development Finance Corporation Limited (“HDFC”), a housing finance company in India which he joined in 1978. Mr. Parekh is the non-executive Chairman (since 1994) of one of our clients, GlaxoSmithKline Pharmaceuticals Ltd. Mr. Parekh is also a director on the board of several Indian public companies such as Siemens Ltd. (since 2003), HDFC Chubb General Insurance Co. Ltd. (since 2002), HDFC Standard Life Insurance Co. Ltd. (since 2000), HDFC Asset Management Co. Ltd (since 2000), Housing Development Finance Corporation Ltd (since 1985), Castrol India Ltd. (since 1997), GlaxoSmithKline Pharmaceuticals Ltd. (since 1994), Infrastructure Development Finance Co. Ltd (since 1997), Hindustan Lever Ltd. (since 1997), Hindustan Oil Exploration Corporation Ltd. (since 1994), Mahindra & Mahinda Ltd. (since 1990) and The Indian Hotels Co. Ltd. (since 2000). Mr. Parekh received a Bachelor of Commerce degree from the Bombay University and holds a Financial Chartered Accountant degree from England and Wales. The business address for Mr. Parekh is Housing Development Finance Corporation Limited, Ramon House, H.T. Parekh Marg, 169 Backbay Reclamation, Churchgate, Mumbai — 400020, India.

Richard O. Bernays was appointed to our board of directors in November 2006. Prior to his retirement in 2001, Mr. Bernays held various senior positions at Old Mutual, plc, a London-based international financial services company, and most recently served as Chief Executive Officer of Old Mutual International. Previously, he was a senior executive at Jupiter Asset Management (1996), Hill Samuel Asset Management (1991 to 1996) and Mercury Asset Management (1971 to 1992). Mr. Bernays currently serves in several board roles, including as non-executive chairman of Hermes Pensions Management, director of Singer and Friedlander (2003 to 2005) and as the non-executive director of Throgmorton Trust plc, Gartmore Global Trust plc, Impax Environmental Markets Trust plc, Martin Curie Income and Growth Trust, Majid Al Futaim Trust and Charter European Trust plc. Mr. Bernays is also a member of the Supervisory Board of the National Provident Life. He received a Masters of Arts degree from Trinity College, Oxford University. The business address of Mr. Bernays is Lloyds Chambers, 1 Portsoken Street, London E1 8H2, England.

Sir Anthony Armitage Greener was appointed to our board of directors in June 2007. Sir Anthony is based in London and is the Chairman of the Qualifications and Curriculum Authority. He was also the Deputy Chairman of British Telecom (2001 to 2006) and Chairman of Diageo plc (1997 to 2000). Prior to that, Sir Anthony was the Chairman and Chief Executive of Guinness plc (1992 to 1997) and the Chief Executive Officer of Dunhill Holdings (1974 to 1986). Sir Anthony was also previously on the board of directors of Robert Mondavi (2000 to 2005), Louis Vuitton Moët Hennessy (1989 to 1997), Reed International (1990 to 1998) and Reed Elsevier plc (1993 to 1998). Sir Anthony is presently a director of Williams Sonoma. Sir Anthony was honored with a knighthood in 1999 for his services to the beverage industry. Sir Anthony is a Fellow Member of the Chartered Institute of Management Accountants, and Vice-President of the Chartered Institute of Marketing. The business address of Sir Anthony is QCA, 83, Piccadilly, W1J 8QA London, England.

Executive Officers