form20f.htm
 
UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549

FORM 20-F
 
(Mark One)
 
o Registration statement pursuant to Section 12(b) or (g) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
 
OR
 
x Annual Report pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
 
For the fiscal year ended March 31, 2013
 
OR
 
o Transition Report pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
 
For the transition period from __________ to __________
 
OR
 
o Shell Company Report pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
 
Date of event requiring this shell company report________

Commission File Number 000-25383
 
INFOSYS LIMITED
(Exact name of Registrant as specified in its charter)
 
Not Applicable
(Translation of Registrant’s name into English)
 
Bangalore, Karnataka, India
(Jurisdiction of incorporation or organization)
 
Electronics City, Hosur Road, Bangalore, Karnataka, India 560 100. +91-80-2852-0261
(Address of principal executive offices)
 
Rajiv Bansal, Chief Financial Officer, +91-80-2852-0261, RajivBansal@infosys.com
Electronics City, Hosur Road, Bangalore, Karnataka, India 560 100.
(Name, telephone, e-mail and/or facsimile number and address of company contact person)

Securities registered or to be registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:
 
 
Title of Each Class
Name of Each Exchange on Which Registered
  
 
American Depositary Shares each represented by one Equity Share, par value rupee symbol5 per share
New York Stock Exchange
  

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:
Not Applicable
(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: 574,236,166 Equity Shares.

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act.
 
Yes x No o
 
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 x
 
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 x No o
 
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data file required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such filed).
 
Yes o 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 x
Accelerated filer o
Non- accelerated filer o
 
Indicate by check mark which basis of accounting the registrant has used to prepare the financial statements included in this filing:
 
U.S. GAAP o International Financial Reporting Standards as issued by the International Accounting Standards Board x Other o
 
If this is an annual report, indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act).
 
Yes o No x
 
Currency of presentation and certain defined terms
 
In this Annual Report on Form 20-F, references to “U.S.” or “United States” are to the United States of America, its territories and its possessions. References to “India” are to the Republic of India. References to “$” or “dollars” or “U.S. dollars” are to the legal currency of the United
 
States and references to “RUPEE SYMBOL” or “Rupees” or “Indian rupees” are to the legal currency of India. Our financial statements are presented in U.S. dollars and are prepared in accordance with the International Financial Reporting Standards as issued by the International Accounting Standards Board, or IFRS. References to a particular “fiscal” year are to our fiscal year ended March 31 of such year.

All references to “we,” “us,” “our,” “Infosys” or the “Company” shall mean Infosys Limited, and, unless specifically indicated otherwise or the context indicates otherwise, our consolidated subsidiaries. “Infosys” is a registered trademark of Infosys Limited in the United States and India. All other trademarks or trade names used in this Annual Report on Form 20-F are the property of their respective owners.

Except as otherwise stated in this Annual Report on Form 20-F, all translations from Indian rupees to U.S. dollars effected on or after April 1, 2009 are based on the fixing rate in the City of Mumbai on March 31, 2013 for cable transfers in Indian rupees as published by the Foreign
 
Exchange Dealers’ Association of India, or FEDAI, which was RUPEE SYMBOL54.29 per $1.00. No representation is made that the Indian rupee amounts have been, could have been or could be converted into U.S. dollars at such a rate or any other rate. Any discrepancies in any table between totals and sums of the amounts listed are due to rounding.

Special Note Regarding Forward Looking Statements

This Annual Report on Form 20-F contains ‘forward-looking statements’, as defined in Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, that are based on our current expectations, assumptions, estimates and projections about our Company, our industry, economic conditions in the markets in which we operate, and certain other matters. 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. These statements are subject to known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors, which may cause actual results or outcomes to differ materially from those implied by the forward-looking statements. Important factors that may cause actual results or outcomes to differ from those implied by the forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to, those discussed in the “Risk Factors” section in this Annual Report on Form 20-F. In light of these and other uncertainties, you should not conclude that the results or outcomes referred to in any of the forward-looking statements will be achieved. All forward-looking statements included in this Annual Report on Form 20-F are based on information available to us on the date hereof, and we do not undertake to update these forward-looking statements to reflect future events or circumstances.

This Annual Report on Form 20-F includes statistical data about the Information Technology (IT) industry that comes from information published by sources including the National Association of Software and Service Companies, or NASSCOM, an industry trade group. This type of data represents only the estimates of NASSCOM, and other sources of industry data. In addition, although we believe that data from these companies is generally reliable, this type of data is inherently imprecise. We caution you not to place undue reliance on this data.

Table of Contents


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

SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA

Summary of Consolidated Financial Data

You should read the summary consolidated financial data below in conjunction with the Company's consolidated financial statements and the related notes, as well as the section entitled “Operating and Financial Review and Prospects,” all of which are included elsewhere in this Annual Report on Form 20-F. The summary consolidated statements of comprehensive income for the five years ended March 31, 2013 and the summary consolidated balance sheet data as of March 31, 2013, 2012, 2011, 2010 and 2009 have been derived from our audited consolidated financial statements and related notes which were prepared and presented in accordance with International Financial Reporting Standards as issued by International Accounting Standards Board (IFRS). Historical results are not necessarily indicative of future results.
(Dollars in millions, except share data)
Comprehensive Income Data
Fiscal Year ended March 31,
 
2013
2012
2011
2010
2009
Revenues
$7,398
$6,994
$6,041
$4,804
$4,663
Cost of sales
4,637
4,118
3,497
2,749
2,699
Gross profit
2,761
2,876
2,544
2,055
1,964
Operating expenses:
    
 
 
 
Selling and marketing expenses
373
366
332
251
239
Administrative expenses
479
497
433
344
351
Total operating expenses
852
863
765
595
590
Operating profit
1,909
2,013
1,779
1,460
1,374
Other income, net
433
397
267
209
101
Profit before income taxes
2,342
2,410
2,046
1,669
1,475
Income tax expense
617
694
547
356
194
Net profit
$1,725
$1,716
$1,499
$1,313
$1,281
Earnings per equity share:
    
 
 
 
Basic ($)
3.02
3.00
2.62
2.30
2.25
Diluted ($)
3.02
3.00
2.62
2.30
2.25
Weighted average equity shares used in computing earnings per equity share:
    
 
 
 
Basic
571,399,238
571,365,494
571,180,050
570,475,923
569,656,611
Diluted
571,400,091
571,396,142
571,368,358
571,116,031
570,629,581
Cash dividend per Equity Share ($)*#
0.86
0.76
1.22
0.48
0.89
Cash dividend per Equity Share (rupee symbol)*
47.00
35.00
55.00
23.50
37.25
* Excludes corporate dividend tax
#Converted at the monthly exchange rate in the month of declaration of dividend.
 
(Dollars in millions)
Balance Sheet Data
 As of March 31,
 
2013
2012
2011
2010
2009
Cash and cash equivalents
$4,021
$4,047
$3,737
$2,698
$2,167
Available-for-sale financial assets, current
320
6
5
561
–
Investments in certificates of deposit
–
68
27
265
–
Net current assets
5,347
5,008
4,496
3,943
2,583
Non-current assets
2,034
1,592
1,698
1,495
1,249
Total assets
8,539
7,537
7,010
6,148
4,369
Non-current liabilities
50
24
72
77
48
Total equity
$7,331
$6,576
$6,122
$5,361
$3,784

Exchange rates

Our functional currency is the Indian rupee. We generate a major portion of our revenues in foreign currencies, particularly the U.S. dollar, the United Kingdom Pound Sterling, Euro and the Australian dollar, whereas we incur a majority of our expenses in Indian rupees. The exchange rate between the rupee and the U.S. dollar has changed substantially in recent years and may fluctuate substantially in the future. Consequently, the results of our operations are adversely affected as the rupee appreciates against the U.S. dollar. For fiscal 2013, 2012, 2011, 2010 and 2009, U.S. dollar denominated revenues represented 70.6%, 71.7%, 72.8%, 73.3% and 71.1% of total revenues. For the same periods, revenues denominated in United Kingdom Pound Sterling represented 6.4%, 6.8%, 7.2%, 9.2% and 12.7% of total revenues, revenues denominated in the Euro represented 8.8%, 7.7%, 6.9%, 6.9%, and 7.1% of total revenues while revenues denominated in the Australian dollar represented 8.3%, 7.6%, 6.5%, 5.8% and 4.6% of total revenues. As such, our exchange rate risk primarily arises from our foreign currency revenues, receivables and payables.

Fluctuations in the exchange rate between the Indian rupee and the U.S. dollar will also affect the U.S. dollar equivalent of the Indian rupee price of our equity shares on the Indian stock exchanges and, as a result, will likely affect the market price of our American Depositary Shares (ADSs) and vice versa. Such fluctuations also impact the U.S. dollar conversion by the Depositary of any cash dividends paid in Indian rupees on our equity shares represented by the ADSs.

The following table sets forth, for the fiscal years indicated, information concerning the number of Indian rupees for which one U.S. dollar could be exchanged based on the fixing rate in the City of Mumbai on business days during the period for cable transfers in Indian rupees as published by the Foreign Exchange Dealers' Association of India, or FEDAI. The column titled “Average” in the table below is the average of the last business day of each month during the year.

Fiscal
Period End
Average
High
Low
 
rupee symbol
rupee symbol
rupee symbol
rupee symbol
2013
54.29
54.54
57.02
50.53
2012
50.88
48.10
54.28
44.00
2011
44.60
45.54
47.36
44.07
2010
44.90
47.43
50.57
44.87
2009
50.72
46.54
52.00
39.88
 
The following table sets forth the high and low exchange rates for the previous six months and is based on the fixing rate in the City of Mumbai on business days during the period for cable transfers in Indian rupees as published by the FEDAI.

Month
High
Low
 
rupee symbol
rupee symbol
April 2013  54.81  53.96
March 2013
54.96
54.07
February 2013
54.48
52.95
January 2013
55.06
53.25
December 2012
55.13
54.21
November 2012
55.67
53.60

On May 13, 2013, the fixing rate in the City of Mumbai for cash transfers in Indian rupees as published by FEDAI was RUPEE SYMBOL54.86.

The exchange rates for month-end and period-end reporting purposes have been based on the FEDAI rates. We believe that exchange rates published by FEDAI are more representative of market exchange rates than exchange rates published by individual banks. However, FEDAI does not publish exchange rates on a daily basis, and in the absence of availability of daily exchange rates from FEDAI, we utilize exchange rates from Deutsche Bank, Mumbai, for daily transactions in the ordinary course of business.

Risk Factors

This Annual Report on Form 20-F 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 certain factors, including those set forth in the following risk factors and elsewhere in this Annual Report on Form 20-F.
Risks Related to Our Company and Our Industry

Our revenues and expenses are difficult to predict and can vary significantly from period to period, which could cause our share price to decline.

Our revenues and profitability have grown rapidly in certain years and are likely to vary significantly in the future from period to period. Therefore, we believe that period-to-period comparisons of our results of operations are not necessarily meaningful and should not be relied upon as an indication of our future performance. It is possible that in the future our results of operations may be below the expectations of market analysts and our investors, which could cause the share price of our equity shares and our ADSs to decline significantly.

Factors which affect the fluctuation of our operating results include:
A significant part of our total operating expenses, particularly expenses related to personnel and facilities, are fixed in advance of any particular period. As a result, unanticipated variations in the number and timing of our projects, employee utilization rates, or the accuracy of our estimates of the resources required to complete ongoing projects may cause significant variations in our operating results in any particular period. There are also a number of factors, other than our performance, that are not within our control that could cause fluctuations in our operating results from period to period. These include:
In addition, the availability of visas for working in the United States may vary substantially from quarter to quarter. Visas for working in the United States may be available during one quarter but not another or there may be differences in the number of visas available from one quarter to another. As such, the variable availability of visas may require us to incur significantly higher visa-related expenses in certain quarters when compared to others. For example, we incurred $60 million in costs for visas during fiscal 2013, compared to $45 million in costs for visas during fiscal 2012. Such fluctuations may affect our operating margins and profitability in certain quarters during a fiscal year.

We may not be able to sustain our previous profit margins or levels of profitability.

Our profitability could be affected by pricing pressures on our services, volatility of the exchange rates between the Indian rupee, the U.S. dollar, and other currencies in which we generate revenues or incur expenses, increased wage pressures in India and at other locations where we maintain operations, and increases in taxes or the expiration of tax benefits.

While our Global Delivery Model allows us to manage costs efficiently, if the proportion of our services delivered at client sites increases, we may not be able to keep our operating costs as low in the future, which would also have an adverse impact on our profit margins. Further, in the past, our profit margin had been adversely impacted by the expiration of certain tax holidays and benefits in India, and we expect that it  may be further adversely affected as additional tax holidays and benefits expire in the future.
 
In addition, we have recently increased operating expenses as a result of wage increases for our employees in India and outside India, the acquisition of Lodestone Holding AG and increasing visa costs. These increased operating expenses could potentially affect our profit margins and results of operations in future periods.

During fiscal 2013, fiscal 2012 and fiscal 2011, there was volatility in the exchange rate of the Indian rupee against the U.S. dollar. The exchange rate for one dollar as published by FEDAI was RUPEE SYMBOL54.29 as of March 31, 2013, compared to RUPEE SYMBOL50.88 as of March 31, 2012 and RUPEE SYMBOL44.60 as of March 31, 2011. Exchange rate fluctuations have in the past adversely impacted, and may in the future adversely impact, our operating results.
 
Increased operating expenses in the future as well as fluctuations in foreign currency exchange rates, including, in particular, the appreciation of the Indian rupee against foreign currencies or the appreciation of the U.S. dollar against other foreign currencies, could materially and adversely affect our profit margins and results of operations in future periods.
 
The economic environment, pricing pressure, and decreased employee utilization rates could negatively impact our revenues and operating results.

Spending on technology products and services is subject to fluctuations depending on many factors, including the economic environment in the markets in which our clients operate. For example, there was a decline in the growth rate of global IT purchases in the latter half of 2008 due to the global economic slowdown. This downward trend continued into 2009, with global IT purchases declining due to the challenging global economic environment. We believe that the economic environment in the markets in which many of our clients operate remains unstable, and that the economic conditions in many countries remain challenging and may continue to be challenging in the near future. For instance, in many European countries, large government deficits together with the downgrading of government debt and credit ratings have escalated concerns about continuing weakness in the economies of such countries.

Reduced IT spending in response to the challenging economic environment has also led to increased pricing pressure from our clients, which has adversely impacted our revenue productivity, which we define as our revenue divided by billed person months. For instance, during fiscal 2013, our revenue productivity on a blended basis, for services other than for business process management, decreased by 3.0% when compared to fiscal 2012.

Many of our clients have also been seeking extensions in credit terms from the standard terms that we provide, including pursuing credit from us for periods of 60 days or more. Extended credit terms may result in reduced revenues in a given period as well as the delay of the realization of revenues, and may adversely affect our cash flows. Additionally, extended credit terms also increase our exposure to customer-specific credit risks.

Reductions in IT spending, reductions in revenue productivity, increased credit risk and extended credit terms arising from or related to the global economic slowdown have in the past adversely impacted, and may in the future adversely impact, our revenues, gross profits, operating margins and results of operations.

Moreover, in the past, reduced or delayed IT spending has also adversely impacted our utilization rates for technology professionals. For instance, in fiscal 2012, our utilization rate for technology professionals, including trainees, was approximately 69.0%, as compared to 72.1% during fiscal 2011. This decrease in employee utilization rates adversely affected our profitability for fiscal 2012, and any decrease in employee utilization rates in the future, whether on account of reduced or delayed IT spending, may adversely impact our results of operations.

In addition to the business challenges and margin pressure resulting from the global economic slowdown and the response of our clients to such slowdown, there is also a growing trend among consumers of IT services towards consolidation of technology service providers in order to improve efficiency and reduce costs. Our success in the competitive bidding process for new consolidation projects or in retaining existing projects is dependent on our ability to fulfill client expectations relating to staffing, efficient offshoring of services, absorption of transition costs, deferment of billing and more stringent service levels. If we fail to meet a client’s expectations in such consolidation projects, this would likely adversely impact our business, revenues and operating margins. In addition, even if we are successful in winning the mandates for such consolidation projects, we may experience significant pressure on our operating margins as a result of the competitive bidding process.

Moreover, our ability to maintain or increase pricing is restricted as clients often expect that as we do more business with them, they will receive volume discounts or special pricing incentives. In addition, existing and new customers are also increasingly using third-party consultants with broad market knowledge to assist them in negotiating contractual terms. Any inability to maintain or increase pricing on account of this practice may also adversely impact our revenues, gross profits, operating margins and results of operations.

Our revenues are highly dependent on clients primarily located in the United States and Europe, as well as on clients concentrated in certain industries, and an economic slowdown or other factors that affect the economic health of the United States, Europe or those industries, or any other impact on the growth of such industries, may affect our business.

In fiscal 2013, fiscal 2012 and fiscal 2011, approximately 62.2%, 63.9% and 65.3% of our revenues were derived from projects in North America. In the same periods, approximately 23.1%, 21.9% and 21.5% of our revenues were derived from projects in Europe.

The recent instability in the global economy, driven by slower growth in developed markets coupled with the European debt crisis, has had an impact on the growth of the IT industry and may continue to impact it in the future. This instability also impacts our business and results of operations, and may continue to do so in the future. The global economy, driven by slower growth in developed markets coupled with the European debt crisis, could have an impact on the growth of the IT industry. If the United States or European economy remains weak or unstable or weakens further, our clients may reduce or postpone their technology spending significantly, which may in turn lower the demand for our services and negatively affect our revenues and profitability.

In fiscal 2013, fiscal 2012 and fiscal 2011, we derived approximately 33.9%, 35.1% and 35.9% of our revenues from the financial services and insurance industry. The crisis in the financial and credit markets in the United States led to significant changes in the financial services industry, with the United States federal government being forced to take over or provide financial support to many leading financial institutions and with some leading investment banks going bankrupt or being forced to sell themselves in distressed circumstances. Global economic uncertainty may result in the reduction, postponement or consolidation of IT spending by our clients, contract terminations, deferrals of projects or delays in purchases, especially in the financial services sector. Any reduction, postponement or consolidation in IT spending may lower the demand for our services or impact the prices that we can obtain for our services and consequently, adversely affect our revenues and profitability.

Any lingering instability or weakness in the United States economy could have a material adverse impact on our revenues, particularly from businesses in the financial services industry and other industries that are particularly vulnerable to a slowdown in consumer spending. In fiscal 2013, fiscal 2012 and fiscal 2011, we derived approximately 33.9%, 35.1% and 35.9% of our revenues from clients in the financial services and insurance industry, approximately 22.0%, 20.6% and 19.6% of our revenues from clients in the manufacturing industry, approximately 20.2%, 21.4% and 24.0% of our revenues from clients in the energy, utilities, communication and services industry and approximately 23.9%, 22.9% and 20.5% of our revenues from clients in the retail, consumer packaged goods, logistics and life sciences, which industries are especially vulnerable to a slowdown in the U.S. economy. Any weakness in the United States economy or in the industry segments from which we generate revenues could have a negative effect on our business and results of operations.
 
Some of the industries in which our clients are concentrated, such as the financial services industry or the energy and utilities industry, are, or may be, increasingly subject to governmental regulation and intervention. For instance, clients in the financial services sector have been subject to increased regulation following the enactment of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act in the United States. Increased regulation, changes in existing regulation or increased governmental intervention in the industries in which our clients operate may adversely affect the growth of their respective businesses and therefore negatively impact our revenues.

Currency fluctuations may affect the results or our operations or the value of our ADSs.
 
Our functional currency is the Indian rupee, although we transact a major portion of our business in several currencies, and, accordingly, face foreign currency exposure through our sales in the United States and elsewhere and purchases from overseas suppliers in various foreign currencies. Generally, we generate the majority of our revenues in foreign currencies, such as the U.S. dollar or the United Kingdom Pound Sterling, and incur the majority of our expenses in Indian rupees. Recently, as a result of the increased volatility in foreign exchange currency markets, there has been increased demand from our clients that all risks associated with foreign exchange fluctuations be borne by us. Also, historically, we have held a substantial majority of our cash funds in Indian rupees. Accordingly, changes in exchange rates may have a material adverse effect on our revenues, other income, cost of services sold, gross margin and net income, and may have a negative impact on our business, operating results and financial condition. For example, during fiscal 2013, 2012 and 2011, every percentage point depreciation / appreciation in the exchange rate between the Indian rupee and the U.S. dollar, has affected the company’s operating margins by approximately 0.4%, 0.5% and 0.5%, respectively.  The exchange rate between the Indian rupee and foreign currencies, including the U.S. dollar, the United Kingdom Pound Sterling, the Euro and the Australian dollar, has changed substantially in recent years and may fluctuate substantially in the future, and this fluctuation in currencies had a material and adverse effect on our operating results in fiscal 2011 and fiscal 2010. We expect that a majority of our revenues will continue to be generated in foreign currencies, including the U.S. dollar, the United Kingdom Pound Sterling, the Euro and the Australian dollar, for the foreseeable future and that a significant portion of our expenses, including personnel costs, as well as capital and operating expenditures, will continue to be denominated in Indian rupees. Consequently, the results of our operations are adversely affected as the Indian rupee appreciates against the U.S. dollar and other foreign currencies.

We use derivative financial instruments such as foreign exchange forward and option contracts to mitigate the risk of changes in foreign exchange rates on accounts receivable and forecast cash flows denominated in certain foreign currencies. As of March 31, 2013, we had outstanding forward contracts of U.S. $851 million, Euro 62 million, United Kingdom Pound Sterling 65 million and Australian dollar 70 million. We may not purchase derivative instruments adequate to insulate ourselves from foreign currency exchange risks. For instance, during fiscal 2009, we incurred significant losses as a result of exchange rate fluctuations that were not offset in full by our hedging strategy.

Additionally, our hedging activities have also contributed to increased losses in recent periods due to volatility in foreign currency markets. For example, in fiscal 2009, we incurred losses of $165 million in our forward and option contracts. These losses, partially offset by gains of $71 million as a result of foreign exchange translations during the same period, resulted in a total loss of $94 million related to foreign currency transactions, which had a significant and adverse effect on our profit margin and results of operations. If foreign currency markets continue to be volatile, such fluctuations in foreign currency exchange rates could materially and adversely affect our profit margins and results of operations in future periods. Also, the volatility in the foreign currency markets may make it difficult to hedge our foreign currency exposures effectively.

Further, the policies of the Reserve Bank of India may change from time to time which may limit our ability to hedge our foreign currency exposures adequately. For instance, full or increased capital account convertibility, if introduced, could result in increased volatility in the fluctuations of exchange rates between the rupee and foreign currencies.

During fiscal 2013, we derived 29.4% of our revenues in currencies other than the U.S. dollar, including 6.4%, 8.8% and 8.3% of our revenues in United Kingdom Pound Sterling, Euro and Australian dollars, respectively. During fiscal 2013, the U.S. dollar appreciated against a majority of the currencies in which we transact business, appreciating by 1.3%, 6.5% and 1.9%, against the United Kingdom Pound Sterling, Euro and the Australian dollar, respectively.

Fluctuations in the exchange rate between the Indian rupee and the U.S. dollar will also affect the dollar conversion by Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas, the Depositary with respect to our ADSs, of any cash dividends paid in Indian rupees on the equity shares represented by the ADSs. In addition, these fluctuations will affect the U.S. dollar equivalent of the Indian rupee price of equity shares on the Indian stock exchanges and, as a result, the prices of our ADSs in the United States, as well as the U.S. dollar value of the proceeds a holder would receive upon the sale in India of any equity shares withdrawn from the Depositary under the Depositary Agreement. Holders may not be able to convert Indian rupee proceeds into U.S. dollars or any other currency, and there is no guarantee of the rate at which any such conversion will occur, if at all.

Our success depends largely upon our highly skilled technology professionals and our ability to hire, attract, motivate, retain and train these personnel.

Our ability to execute projects, maintain our client relationships and obtain new clients depends largely on our ability to attract, train, motivate and retain highly skilled technology professionals, particularly project managers and other mid-level professionals. If we cannot hire, motivate and retain personnel, our ability to bid for projects, obtain new projects and expand our business will be impaired and our revenues could decline.

We believe that there is significant worldwide competition for skilled technology professionals. Additionally, technology companies, particularly in India, have recently increased their hiring efforts. Increasing worldwide competition for skilled technology professionals and increased hiring by technology companies may affect our ability to hire an adequate number of skilled and experienced technology professionals and may have an adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

Increasing competition for technology professionals in India may also impact our ability to retain personnel. For example, our attrition rate for the twelve months ended March 31, 2013 was 16.3%, compared to our attrition rate for the twelve months ended March 31, 2012, which was 14.7%, without accounting for attrition in Infosys BPO or our other subsidiaries.

We may not be able to hire enough skilled and experienced technology professionals to replace employees who we are not able to retain. If we are unable to motivate and retain technology professionals, this could have an adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

Changes in policies or laws may also affect the ability of technology companies to attract and retain personnel. For instance, the central government or state governments in India may introduce legislation requiring employers to give preferential hiring treatment to underrepresented groups. The quality of our work force is critical to our business. If any such central government or state government legislation becomes effective, our ability to hire the most highly qualified technology professionals may be hindered.

In addition, the demands of changes in technology, evolving standards and changing client preferences may require us to redeploy and retrain our technology professionals. If we are unable to redeploy and retrain our technology professionals to keep pace with continuing changes in technology, evolving standards and changing client preferences, this may adversely affect our ability to bid for and obtain new projects and may have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

Any inability to manage our growth could disrupt our business and reduce our profitability.

We have grown significantly in recent periods. Between March 31, 2008 and March 31, 2013 our total employees grew from approximately 91,200 to approximately 156,000. We added approximately 6,700, 19,200, 17,000, 8,900 and 13,700 new employees, net of attrition, in fiscal 2013, fiscal 2012, fiscal 2011, fiscal 2010 and fiscal 2009, respectively.
 
In addition, in the last five years we have undertaken and continue to undertake major expansions of our existing facilities, as well as the construction of new facilities. We expect our growth to place significant demands on our management team and other resources. Our growth will require us to continuously develop and improve our operational, financial and other internal controls, both in India and elsewhere. In addition, continued growth increases the challenges involved in:
Our growth strategy also relies on the expansion of our operations around the world, including Europe, Australia, Latin America and other parts of Asia. During fiscal 2010, Infosys BPO acquired 100% of the voting interest in McCamish Systems LLC (McCamish), a business process solutions provider based in Atlanta, Georgia, in the United States. In fiscal 2010, we established a wholly owned subsidiary, Infosys Tecnologia do Brasil, Ltda, in Brazil to provide information technology services in Latin America. Further, during fiscal 2010, we formed Infosys Public Services, Inc. to focus on governmental outsourcing and consulting in the United States. In fiscal 2011, we formed Infosys Technologies (Shanghai) Company Limited. In fiscal 2012, Infosys BPO completed the acquisition of Portland Group Pty Ltd., a leading provider of strategic sourcing and category management services based in Australia. In fiscal 2013, McCamish completed the acquisition of BPO division of Seabury & Smith Inc., a company providing back office services to life insurers. Further, in fiscal 2013, we completed the acquisition of Lodestone Holding AG, a global management consultancy firm.

The costs involved in entering and establishing ourselves in new markets, and expanding such operations, may be higher than expected and we may face significant competition in these regions. Our inability to manage our expansion and related growth in these markets or regions may have an adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

We may face difficulties in providing end-to-end business solutions for our clients, which could lead to clients discontinuing their work with us, which in turn could harm our business.

Over the past several years, we have been expanding the nature and scope of our engagements by extending the breadth of services that we offer. The success of some of our newer service offerings, such as operations and business process consulting, IT consulting, business process management, systems integration and infrastructure management, depends, in part, upon continued demand for such services by our existing and new clients and our ability to meet this demand in a cost-competitive and effective manner. In addition, our ability to effectively offer a wider breadth of end-to-end business solutions depends on our ability to attract existing or new clients to these service offerings. To obtain engagements for our end-to-end solutions, we are competing with large, well-established international consulting firms as well as other India-based technology services companies, resulting in increased competition and marketing costs. Accordingly, our new service offerings may not effectively meet client needs and we may be unable to attract existing and new clients to these service offerings.

The increased breadth of our service offerings may result in larger and more complex client projects. This will require us to establish closer relationships with our clients and potentially with other technology service providers and vendors, and require a more thorough understanding of our clients’ operations. Our ability to establish these relationships will depend on a number of factors including the proficiency of our technology professionals and our management personnel.

Larger projects often involve multiple components, engagements or stages, and a client may choose not to retain us for additional stages or may cancel or delay additional planned engagements. These terminations, cancellations or delays may result from the business or financial condition of our clients or the economy generally, as opposed to factors related to the quality of our services. Cancellations or delays make it difficult to plan for project resource requirements, and resource planning inaccuracies may have a negative impact on our profitability.

Intense competition in the market for technology services could affect our cost advantages, which could reduce our share of business from clients and decrease our revenues.

The technology services market is highly competitive. Our competitors include large consulting firms, captive divisions of large multinational technology firms, infrastructure management services firms, Indian technology services firms, software companies and in-house IT departments of large corporations.

The technology services industry is experiencing rapid changes that are affecting the competitive landscape, including recent divestitures and acquisitions that have resulted in consolidation within the industry. These changes may result in larger competitors with significant resources. In addition, some of our competitors have added or announced plans to add cost-competitive offshore capabilities to their service offerings. These competitors may be able to offer their services using the offshore and onsite model more efficiently than we can. Many of these competitors are also substantially larger than us and have significant experience with international operations. We may face competition in countries where we currently operate, as well as in countries in which we expect to expand our operations. We also expect additional competition from technology services firms with current operations in other countries, such as China and the Philippines. Many of our competitors have significantly greater financial, technical and marketing resources, generate greater revenues, have more extensive existing client relationships and technology partners and have greater brand recognition than we do. We may be unable to compete successfully against these competitors, or may lose clients to these competitors. Additionally, we believe that our ability to compete also depends in part on factors outside our control, such as the price at which our competitors offer comparable services, and the extent of our competitors’ responsiveness to their clients’ needs.

Our revenues are highly dependent upon a small number of clients, and the loss of any one of our major clients could significantly impact our business.

We have historically earned, and believe that in the future we will continue to earn, a significant portion of our revenues from a limited number of clients. In fiscal 2013, fiscal 2012 and fiscal 2011, our largest client accounted for 3.8%, 4.3% and 4.7% of our total revenues, respectively, and our five largest clients together accounted for 15.2%, 15.5% and 15.4% of our total revenues respectively. The volume of work we perform for specific clients is likely to vary from year to year, particularly since we historically have not been the exclusive external technology services provider for our clients. Thus, a major client in one year may not provide the same level of revenues in a subsequent year. However, in any given year, a limited number of clients tend to contribute a significant portion of our revenues. There are a number of factors, other than our performance, that could cause the loss of a client and that may not be predictable. In certain cases, we have significantly reduced the services provided to a client when the client either changed its outsourcing strategy by moving more work in-house or replaced its existing software with packaged software supported by the licensor. Reduced technology spending in response to a challenging economic or competitive environment may also result in our loss of a client. If we lose one of our major clients or one of our major clients significantly reduces its volume of business with us or there is an increase in the accounts receivables from any of our major clients, our revenues and profitability could be reduced.

Legislation in certain countries in which we operate, including the United States and the United Kingdom, may restrict companies in those countries from outsourcing work to us, or may limit our ability to send our employees to certain client sites.

Recently, some countries and organizations have expressed concerns about a perceived association between offshore outsourcing and the loss of jobs. With the growth of offshore outsourcing receiving increased political and media attention, especially in the United States, which is our largest market, and particularly given the prevailing economic environment, it is possible that there could be a change in the existing laws or the enactment of new legislation restricting offshore outsourcing or imposing restrictions on the deployment of, and regulating the wages of, work visa holders at client locations, which may adversely impact our ability to do business in the jurisdictions in which we operate, especially with governmental entities. For instance, the Governor of the State of Ohio issued an executive order that prohibits any cabinet agency, board or commission of the State of Ohio from expending public funds for services that are provided offshore. It is also possible that private sector companies working with these governmental entities may be restricted from outsourcing projects related to government contracts or may face disincentives if they outsource certain operations.
 
In addition, the U.S. Congress is considering extensive changes to U.S. immigration laws regarding the admission of high-skilled temporary and permanent workers. Legislation in the U.S. Senate would, among other things, increase the annual H-1B numerical cap from 65,000 to at least 110,000 and would reduce the existing green card backlog for professional workers. However, all employers would be required to pay higher wages to H-1B workers and conduct additional U.S. worker recruitment. Furthermore, the proposed Senate legislation includes several provisions intended to limit the number of H-1B and L-1 workers in a company's U.S. workforce and the ability of a company to place H-1B and L-1B workers at third party worksites. For example, the Senate legislation would prohibit a company from having more than fifty percent of its U.S. workforce in H-1B or L-1 status and a company with more than thirty percent of its U.S. workforce in H-1B or L-1 status would be required to pay an additional $5000 fee per foreign temporary worker. A company with more than fifteen percent of its workforce in H-1B status would be prohibited from placing H-1B workers at third party worksites. If those provisions are signed into law, our cost of doing business in the United States would increase and that may discourage customers from seeking our services. This could have a material and adverse effect on our business, revenues and operating results.

Further the recent credit crisis in the United States and elsewhere has also resulted in the United States federal government and governments in Europe acquiring or proposing to acquire equity positions in leading financial institutions and banks. If either the United States federal government or another governmental entity acquires an equity position in any of our clients, any resulting changes in management or reorganizations may result in deferrals or cancellations of projects or delays in purchase decisions, which may have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations or financial condition. Moreover, equity investments by governmental entities in, or governmental financial aid to, our clients may involve restrictions on the ability of such clients to outsource offshore or otherwise restrict offshore IT vendors from utilizing the services of work visa holders at client locations. Any restriction on our ability to deploy our trained offshore resources at client locations may in turn require us to replace our existing offshore resources with local resources, or hire additional local resources, which local resources may only be available at higher wages. Any resulting increase in our compensation, hiring and training expenses could adversely impact our revenues and operating profitability.

In addition, the European Union (EU) member states have adopted the Acquired Rights Directive, while some European countries outside of the EU have enacted similar legislation. The Acquired Rights Directive and certain local laws in European countries that implement the Acquired Rights Directive, such as the Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employees) Regulations, or TUPE, in the United Kingdom, allow employees who are dismissed as a result of “service provision changes”, which may include outsourcing to non-EU companies, to seek compensation either from the company from which they were dismissed or from the company to which the work was transferred. This could deter EU companies from outsourcing work to us and could also result in us being held liable for redundancy payments to such workers. Any such event could adversely affect our revenues and operating profitability.

Restrictions on immigration may affect our ability to compete for and provide services to clients in the United States, Europe and other jurisdictions, which could hamper our growth or cause our revenues to decline.

The vast majority of our employees are Indian nationals. Most of our projects require a portion of the work to be completed at the client’s location. The ability of our technology professionals to work in the United States, Europe and in other countries depends on the ability to obtain the necessary visas and work permits.

As of March 31, 2013, the majority of our technology professionals in the United States held either H-1B visas (approximately 10,800 persons), which allow the employee to remain in the United States for up to six years during the term of the work permit and work as long as he or she remains an employee of the sponsoring firm, or L-1 visas (approximately 1,600 persons) which allow the employee to stay in the United States only temporarily.
 
Although there is no limit to new L-1 visas, there is a limit to the aggregate number of new H-1B visas that the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, or CIS, may approve in any government fiscal year which is 65,000 annually, plus 20,000 additional H-1B visas that are available to skilled workers who possess a Master's or higher degree from institutions of higher education in the United States. Further, in response to the terrorist attacks in the United States, the CIS has increased its level of scrutiny in granting new visas. This may, in the future, also lead to limits on the number of L-1 visas granted. In addition, the granting of L-1 visas precludes companies from obtaining such visas for employees with specialized knowledge: (1) if such employees will be stationed primarily at the worksite of another company in the U.S. and the employee will not be controlled and supervised by his or her employer, or (2) if such offsite placement is essentially an arrangement to provide labor for hire rather than in connection with the employee's specialized knowledge. Immigration laws in the United States or other jurisdictions where we conduct business may also require us to meet certain levels of compensation, and to comply with other legal requirements, including labor certifications, as a condition to obtaining or maintaining work visas for our technology professionals working in such countries.

Immigration laws in the United States and in other countries are subject to legislative change, as well as to variations in standards of application and enforcement due to political forces and economic conditions. In addition, the U.S. Congress is considering extensive changes to U.S. immigration laws regarding the admission of high-skilled temporary and permanent workers. Legislation in the U.S. Senate would, among other things, increase the annual H-1B numerical cap from 65,000 to at least 110,000 and would reduce the existing green card backlog for professional workers. However, all employers would be required to pay higher wages to H-1B workers and conduct additional U.S. worker recruitment. Furthermore, the proposed Senate legislation includes several provisions intended to limit the number of H-1B and L-1 workers in a company's U.S. workforce and the ability of a company to place H-1B and L-1B workers at third party worksites. For example, the Senate legislation would prohibit a company from having more than fifty percent of its U.S. workforce in H-1B or L-1 status and a company with more than thirty percent of its U.S. workforce in H-1B or L-1 status would be required to pay an additional $5000 fee per foreign temporary worker. A company with more than fifteen percent of its workforce in H-1B status would be prohibited from placing H-1B workers at third party worksites. If those provisions are signed into law, our cost of doing business in the United States would increase and that may discourage customers from seeking our services. This could have a material and adverse effect on our business, revenues and operating results.
 
In addition, the U.K. government has recently introduced an interim limit on the number of visas that may be granted. It is difficult to predict the political and economic events that could affect immigration laws, or the restrictive impact they could have on obtaining or monitoring work visas for our technology professionals. Our reliance on work visas for a significant number of technology professionals makes us particularly vulnerable to such changes and variations as it affects our ability to staff projects with technology professionals who are not citizens of the country where the work is to be performed. Recently, there has been an increase in the number of rejections of visa applications. This may affect our ability to get timely visas and accordingly staff projects. As a result, we may not be able to obtain a sufficient number of visas for our technology professionals or may encounter delays or additional costs in obtaining or maintaining the conditions of such visas. Additionally, we may have to apply in advance for visas and this could result in additional expenses during certain quarters of the fiscal year.
 
In addition, in the event that any governmental authority undertakes any actions which limit any visa program that we utilize, or imposes sanctions, fines or penalties on us or our employees, this could materially and adversely affect our business and results of operations. This could potentially increase the rejection rates of our visa applications which would impact our onsite staffing.
 
On May 23, 2011, we received a subpoena from a grand jury in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas. The subpoena required that we provide to the grand jury certain documents and records related to our sponsorships for, and uses of, B1 business visas. We have complied with the subpoena. In connection with the subpoena, during a meeting with the United States Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of Texas, we were advised that we and certain of our employees are targets of the grand jury investigation. In addition, we were recently advised that this investigation was continuing and additional subpoenas may be issued. We are engaged in discussions with the U.S. Attorney’s Office regarding this matter; however, we cannot predict the final outcome of the investigation or the discussions with the U.S. Attorney’s Office.

In addition, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (“DHS”) has reviewed our employer eligibility verifications on Form I-9 with respect to our employees working in the United States. In connection with this review, we have been advised that the DHS has found errors in a significant percentage of our Forms I-9 that the DHS has reviewed, and may impose fines and penalties on us related to such alleged errors. At this time, we cannot predict the outcome of the discussions with DHS or other governmental authority regarding the review of our Forms I-9.

In the event that the U.S. government undertakes any actions which limit the B-1 business visa program or other visa program that we utilize, this could materially and adversely affect our business and results of operations.  Further, in the event that any governmental authority imposes sanctions, fines or penalties on us or our employees, this could materially and adversely affect our business and results of operations.

In light of the fact that, among other things, the grand jury is continuing its investigation and we remain in discussions with the U.S. Attorney’s Office regarding these matters, we are unable to make an estimate of the amount or range of loss that we expect to incur in connection with the resolution of these matters.

In addition, we are subject to legal proceedings and claims, which have arisen in the ordinary course of our business. Our management does not reasonably expect that these legal actions, when ultimately concluded and determined, will have a material and adverse effect on our results of operations or financial condition.

Our success depends in large part upon our management team and key personnel and our ability to attract and retain them.

We are highly dependent on the senior members of our board of directors, or the Board, and the management team, including the continued efforts of our Co-Chairman, our Chief Executive Officer, our Chief Financial Officer, other executive members of the Board and members of our executive council, which consists of certain executive and other officers. Our future performance will be affected by any disruptions in the continued service of our directors, executives and other officers. For instance, in fiscal 2012, there were significant changes to our Board and senior management, including the appointment of a new Chief Executive Officer and a new Chairman of our Board. In fiscal 2012, we internally reorganized our business units, which could have operational risks, including potential attrition of some key senior management personnel. On November 1, 2012, Mr. Rajiv Bansal replaced Mr. V. Balakrishnan as our Chief Financial Officer. We cannot assure you that the departure of directors and the transition of management personnel will not cause disruption to our operations or customer relationships, or materially impact our results of operations.

Competition for senior management in our industry is intense, and we may not be able to retain senior management personnel or attract and retain new senior management personnel in the future. Furthermore, we do not maintain key man life insurance for any of the senior members of our management team or other key personnel. The loss of any member of our senior management or other key personnel may have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

Our failure to complete fixed-price, fixed-timeframe contracts or transaction-based pricing contracts within budget and on time may negatively affect our profitability.

As an element of our business strategy, in response to client requirements and pressures on IT budgets, we are offering an increasing portion of our services on a fixed-price, fixed-timeframe basis, rather than on a time-and-materials basis. In fiscal 2013, fiscal 2012 and fiscal 2011, revenues from fixed-price, fixed-timeframe projects accounted for 40.0%, 39.3% and 40.3% of our total services revenues, respectively, including revenues from our business process management services. In addition, pressure on the IT budgets of our clients has led us to deviate from our standard pricing policies and to offer varied pricing models to our clients in certain situations in order to remain competitive. For example, we have recently begun entering into transaction-based pricing contracts with certain clients who were not previously offered such terms in order to give our clients the flexibility to pay as they use our services.

The risk of entering into fixed-price, fixed-timeframe arrangements and transaction-based pricing arrangements is that if we fail to properly estimate the appropriate pricing for a project, we may incur lower profits or losses as a result of being unable to execute projects on the timeframe and with the amount of labor we expected. Although we use our software engineering methodologies and processes and past project experience to reduce the risks associated with estimating, planning and performing fixed-price, fixed-timeframe projects and transaction-based pricing projects, we bear the risk of cost overruns, completion delays and wage inflation in connection with these projects. If we fail to estimate accurately the resources and time required for a project, future wage inflation rates, or currency exchange rates, or if we fail to complete our contractual obligations within the contracted timeframe, our profitability may suffer. We expect that we will continue to enter into fixed-price, fixed-timeframe and transaction-based pricing engagements in the future, and such engagements may increase in relation to the revenues generated from engagements on a time-and-materials basis, which would increase the risks to our business.

Our client contracts can typically be terminated without cause and with little or no notice or penalty, which could negatively impact our revenues and profitability.

Our clients typically retain us on a non-exclusive, project-by-project basis. Most of our client contracts, including those that are on a fixed-price, fixed-timeframe basis, can be terminated with or without cause, with between zero and 90 days notice and without any termination-related penalties. Our business is dependent on the decisions and actions of our clients, and there are a number of factors relating to our clients that are outside of our control which might lead to termination of a project or the loss of a client, including:
Our inability to control the termination of client contracts could have a negative impact on our financial condition and results of operations.

Our engagements with customers are singular in nature and do not necessarily provide for subsequent engagements.

Our clients generally retain us on a short-term, engagement-by-engagement basis in connection with specific projects, rather than on a recurring basis under long-term contracts. Although a substantial majority of our revenues are generated from repeat business, which we define as revenue from a client who also contributed to our revenue during the prior fiscal year, our engagements with our clients are typically for projects that are singular in nature. Therefore, we must seek out new engagements when our current engagements are successfully completed or terminated, and we are constantly seeking to expand our business with existing clients and secure new clients for our services. In addition, in order to continue expanding our business, we may need to significantly expand our sales and marketing group, which would increase our expenses and may not necessarily result in a substantial increase in business. If we are unable to generate a substantial number of new engagements for projects on a continual basis, our business and results of operations would likely be adversely affected.

Our client contracts are often conditioned upon our performance, which, if unsatisfactory, could result in less revenue than previously anticipated.

A number of our contracts have incentive-based or other pricing terms that condition some or all of our fees on our ability to meet defined performance goals or service levels. Our failure to meet these goals or a client’s expectations in such performance-based contracts may result in a less profitable or an unprofitable engagement.

Some of our long-term client contracts contain benchmarking provisions which, if triggered, could result in lower future revenues and profitability under the contract.

As the size and duration of our client engagements increase, clients may increasingly require benchmarking provisions. Benchmarking provisions allow a customer in certain circumstances to request a benchmark study prepared by an agreed upon third-party comparing our pricing, performance and efficiency gains for delivered contract services to that of an agreed upon list of other service providers for comparable services. Based on the results of the benchmark study and depending on the reasons for any unfavorable variance, we may be required to reduce the pricing for future services performed under the balance of the contract, which could have an adverse impact on our revenues and profitability. Benchmarking provisions in our client engagements may have a greater impact on our results of operations during an economic slowdown, because pricing pressure and the resulting decline in rates may lead to a reduction in fees that we charge to clients that have benchmarking provisions in their engagements with us.

Our increasing work with governmental agencies may expose us to additional risks.

Currently, the vast majority of our clients are privately or publicly owned. However, we are increasingly bidding for work with governments and governmental agencies, both within and outside the United States. Projects involving governments or governmental agencies carry various risks inherent in the government contracting process, including the following:
In addition, we operate in jurisdictions in which local business practices may be inconsistent with international regulatory requirements, including anti-corruption and anti-bribery regulations prescribed under the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA), and the U.K. Bribery Act 2010, which, among other things, prohibits giving or offering to give anything of value with the intent to influence the awarding of government contracts. Although we believe that we have adequate policies and enforcement mechanisms to ensure legal and regulatory compliance with the FCPA, the Bribery Act 2010 and other similar regulations, it is possible that some of our employees, subcontractors, agents or partners may violate any such legal and regulatory requirements, which may expose us to criminal or civil enforcement actions, including penalties and suspension or disqualification from U.S. federal procurement contracting. If we fail to comply with legal and regulatory requirements, our business and reputation may be harmed.

Any of the above factors could have a material and adverse effect on our business or our results of operations.

Our business will suffer if we fail to anticipate and develop new services and enhance existing services in order to keep pace with rapid changes in technology and in the industries on which we focus.

The technology services market is characterized by rapid technological change, evolving industry standards, changing client preferences and new product and service introductions. Our future success will depend on our ability to anticipate these advances and develop new product and service offerings to meet client needs. We may fail to anticipate or respond to these advances in a timely basis, or, if we do respond, the services or technologies that we develop may not be successful in the marketplace. The development of some of the services and technologies may involve significant upfront investments and the failure of these services and technologies may result in our being unable to recover these investments, in part or in full. Further, products, services or technologies that are developed by our competitors may render our services non-competitive or obsolete.

We have recently introduced, and propose to introduce, several new solutions involving complex delivery models combined with innovative, and often transaction-based, pricing models. Some of our solutions, including the Software as a Service, or SaaS, solution, are often based on a transaction-based pricing model even though these solutions require us to incur significant upfront costs. The advent of new technologies like cloud computing, and new initiatives, such as enterprise mobility and environment sustainability, and the pace of adoption of new technologies and initiatives by clients could have potential impact on our growth. The complexity of these solutions, our inexperience in developing or implementing them and significant competition in the markets for these solutions may affect our ability to market these solutions successfully. Further, customers may not adopt these solutions widely and we may be unable to recover any investments made in these solutions. Even if these solutions are successful in the market, the dependence of these solutions on third-party hardware and software and on our ability to meet stringent service levels in providing maintenance or support services may result in our being unable to deploy these solutions successfully or profitably. Further, where we offer a transaction-based pricing model in connection with an engagement, we may also be unable to recover any upfront costs incurred in solutions deployed by us in full.

Compliance with new and changing corporate governance and public disclosure requirements adds uncertainty to our compliance policies and increases our costs of compliance.

Changing laws, regulations and standards relating to accounting, corporate governance and public disclosure, including the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, new SEC regulations, New York Stock Exchange rules, NYSE Euronext Paris rules, NYSE Euronext London rules, Securities and Exchange Board of India, or SEBI, rules and Indian stock market listing regulations create uncertainty for our company. These new or changed laws, regulations and standards may lack specificity and are subject to varying interpretations. Their application in practice may evolve over time as new guidance is provided by regulatory and governing bodies. This could result in continuing uncertainty regarding compliance matters and higher costs of compliance as a result of ongoing revisions to such governance standards.

In particular, continuing compliance with Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and the related regulations regarding our required assessment of our internal control over financial reporting requires the commitment of significant financial and managerial resources and our independent auditor’s independent assessment of the internal control over financial reporting.
 
In connection with the Annual Report on Form 20-F for fiscal 2013, our management assessed our internal controls over financial reporting, and determined that our internal controls were effective as of March 31, 2013. However, we will undertake management assessments of our internal control over financial reporting in connection with each annual report, and any deficiencies uncovered by these assessments or any inability of our auditors to issue an unqualified opinion could harm our reputation and the price of our equity shares and ADSs.

Further, since 2009 and continuing into 2013, there has been an increased focus on corporate governance by the U.S. Congress and by the SEC in response to the credit and financial crisis in the United States. As a result of this increased focus, additional corporate governance standards have been promulgated with respect to companies whose securities are listed in the United States, including standards promulgated pursuant to the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, and more governance standards are expected to be imposed on companies whose securities are listed in the United States in the future.

It is also possible that laws in India may be made more stringent with respect to standards of accounting, auditing, public disclosure and corporate governance. We are committed to maintaining high standards of corporate governance and public disclosure, and our efforts to comply with evolving laws, regulations and standards in this regard have resulted in, and are likely to continue to result in, increased general and administrative expenses and a diversion of management time and attention from revenue-generating activities to compliance activities.

In addition, it may become more expensive or more difficult for us to obtain director and officer liability insurance. Further, our Board members, Chief Executive Officer, and Chief Financial Officer could face an increased risk of personal liability in connection with their performance of duties and our SEC reporting obligations. As a result, we may face difficulties attracting and retaining qualified Board members and executive officers, which could harm our business. If we fail to comply with new or changed laws or regulations, our business and reputation may be harmed.

Disruptions in telecommunications, system failures, or virus attacks could harm our ability to execute our Global Delivery Model, which could result in client dissatisfaction and a reduction of our revenues.

A significant element of our distributed project management methodology, which we refer to as our Global Delivery Model, is to continue to leverage and expand our global development centers. We currently have 87 global development centers located in various countries around the world. Our global development centers are linked with a telecommunications network architecture that uses multiple service providers and various satellite and optical links with alternate routing. We may not be able to maintain active voice and data communications between our various global development centers and our clients’ sites at all times due to disruptions in these networks, system failures or virus attacks. Any significant failure in our ability to communicate could result in a disruption in business, which could hinder our performance or our ability to complete client projects on time. This, in turn, could lead to client dissatisfaction and a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

We may be liable to our clients for damages caused by disclosure of confidential information, system failures, errors or unsatisfactory performance of services.

We are often required to collect and store sensitive or confidential client and customer data. Many of our client agreements do not limit our potential liability for breaches of confidentiality. If any person, including any of our employees, penetrates our network security or misappropriates sensitive data, we could be subject to significant liability from our clients or from our clients’ customers for breaching contractual confidentiality provisions or privacy laws. Unauthorized disclosure of sensitive or confidential client and customer data, whether through breach of our computer systems, systems failure or otherwise, could damage our reputation and cause us to lose clients.

Many of our contracts involve projects that are critical to the operations of our clients’ businesses, and provide benefits which may be difficult to quantify. Any failure in a client’s system or breaches of security could result in a claim for substantial damages against us, regardless of our responsibility for such failure. Furthermore, any errors by our employees in the performance of services for a client, or poor execution of such services, could result in a client terminating our engagement and seeking damages from us.

Although we generally attempt to limit our contractual liability for consequential damages in rendering our services, these limitations on liability may be unenforceable in some cases, or may be insufficient to protect us from liability for damages. We maintain general liability insurance coverage, including coverage for errors or omissions, however, this coverage may not continue to be available on reasonable terms and may be unavailable in sufficient amounts to cover one or more large claims. Also an insurer might disclaim coverage as to any future claim. A successful assertion of one or more large claims against us that exceeds our available insurance coverage or changes in our insurance policies, including premium increases or the imposition of a large deductible or co-insurance requirement, could adversely affect our operating results.

Recently, many of our clients have been seeking more favorable terms from us in our contracts, particularly in connection with clauses related to the limitation of our liability for damages resulting from unsatisfactory performance of services. The inclusion of such terms in our client contracts, particularly where they relate to our attempt to limit our contractual liability for damages, may increase our exposure to liability in the case of our failure to perform services in a manner required under the relevant contracts. Further, any damages resulting from such failure, particularly where we are unable to recover such damages in full from our insurers, may adversely impact our business, revenues and operating margins.

We are investing substantial cash assets in new facilities and physical infrastructure, and our profitability could be reduced if our business does not grow proportionately.

As of March 31, 2013, we had contractual commitments of approximately $312 million for capital expenditures, including commitments related to the expansion or construction of facilities. We may encounter cost overruns or project delays in connection with expansion of existing facilities and construction of new facilities. Expansions of existing facilities and construction of new facilities will increase our fixed costs. If we are unable to grow our business and revenues proportionately, our profitability will be reduced.

We may be unable to recoup our investment costs to develop our software products.

In fiscal 2013, fiscal 2012 and fiscal 2011, we earned 4.0%, 4.6% and 4.9% of our total revenue from the licensing of software products, respectively. The development of our software products requires significant investments. The markets for our primary suite of software products, which we call FinacleTM, are competitive. Our current software products or any new software products that we develop may not be commercially successful and the costs of developing such new software products may not be recouped. Since software product revenues typically occur in periods subsequent to the periods in which the costs are incurred for the development of such software products, delayed revenues may cause periodic fluctuations in our operating results.

We may engage in acquisitions, strategic investments, strategic partnerships or alliances or other ventures that may or may not be successful.

We may acquire or make strategic investments in complementary businesses, technologies, services or products, or enter into strategic partnerships or alliances with third parties in order to enhance our business. For example, during fiscal 2010, Infosys BPO completed the acquisition of McCamish Systems LLC, a business process solutions provider based in Atlanta, Georgia, in the United States. In fiscal 2012, Infosys BPO completed the acquisition of Portland Group Pty Ltd., a leading provider of strategic sourcing and category management services based in Australia. In fiscal 2013, we acquired Lodestone Holding AG, a global management consultancy firm.

It is possible that we may not identify suitable acquisitions, candidates for strategic investment or strategic partnerships, or if we do identify suitable targets, we may not complete those transactions on terms commercially acceptable to us, or at all. Our inability to identify suitable acquisition targets or investments or our inability to complete such transactions may affect our competitiveness and growth prospects.

Even if we are able to identify an acquisition that we would like to consummate, we may not be able to complete the acquisition on commercially reasonable terms or the target may be acquired by another company. Furthermore, in the event that we are able to identify and consummate any future acquisitions, we could:
These financing activities or expenditures could harm our business, operating results and financial condition or the price of our common stock. Alternatively, due to difficulties in the capital and credit markets, we may be unable to secure capital on acceptable terms, if at all, to complete acquisitions.

Moreover, even if we do obtain benefits from acquisitions in the form of increased sales and earnings, there may be a delay between the time when the expenses associated with an acquisition are incurred and the time when we recognize such benefits.

Further, if we acquire a company, we could have difficulty 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. These difficulties could disrupt our ongoing business, distract our management and employees and increase our expenses.

We have made, and may in the future make, strategic investments in early-stage technology start-up companies in order to gain experience in or exploit niche technologies. However, our investments may not be successful. The lack of profitability of any of our investments could have a material adverse effect on our operating results.

We may be the subject of litigation which, if adversely determined, could harm our business and operating results.

We are, and may in the future be, subject to legal claims arising in the normal course of business. An unfavorable outcome on any litigation matter could require that we pay substantial damages, or, in connection with any intellectual property infringement claims, could require that we pay ongoing royalty payments or prevent us from selling certain of our products. In addition, we may decide to settle any litigation, which could cause us to incur significant costs. A settlement or an unfavorable outcome on any litigation matter could have a material adverse effect on our business, operating results, financial position or cash flows.

The markets in which we operate are subject to the risk of earthquakes, floods, tsunamis and other natural and manmade disasters.

Some of the regions that we operate in are prone to earthquakes, floods, tsunamis and other natural and manmade disasters. In the event that any of our business centers are affected by any such disasters, we may sustain damage to our operations and properties, suffer significant financial losses or be unable to complete our client engagements in a timely manner, if at all. Further, in the event of a natural disaster, we may also incur costs in redeploying personnel and property. For instance, as a result of the natural disasters in Japan in March 2011, and the resulting fallout of nuclear radiation from damaged nuclear power plants, we were required to temporarily relocate some of the employees from our offices in Japan to India. In addition, if there is a major earthquake, flood or other natural disaster in any of the locations in which our significant customers are located, we face the risk that our customers may incur losses, or sustained business interruption, which may materially impair our ability to provide services to our customers and may limit their ability to continue their purchase of products or services from us. A major earthquake, flood or other natural disaster in the markets in which we operate could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

Risks Related to Investments in Indian Companies and International Operations Generally

Our net income would decrease if the Government of India reduces or withdraws tax benefits and other incentives it provides to us or when our tax holidays expire or terminate.

We have benefited from certain tax incentives the Government of India had provided to the export of software from specially designated software technology parks, or STPs, in India and we continue to benefit from certain tax incentives for facilities set up under the Special Economic Zones Act, 2005. However, the tax incentives provided by the Government of India for STPs have expired, and all of our STP units are now taxable.

In the Finance Act, 2005, the Government of India introduced a separate tax holiday scheme for units set up under designated special economic zones, or SEZs, engaged in manufacture of articles or in provision of services. Under this scheme, units in designated SEZs which begin providing services on or after April 1, 2005, will be eligible for a deduction of 100% of profits or gains derived from the export of software or services for the first five years from commencement of provision of software or services and 50% of such profits or gains for the following five years. Certain tax benefits are also available for five additional years subject to the unit meeting defined conditions.

As a result of these tax incentives, a portion of our pre-tax income has not been subject to tax in recent years.

These tax incentives resulted in a decrease of $202 million, $202 million and $173 million in our income tax expense for fiscal 2013, fiscal 2012 and fiscal 2011 respectively, compared to the effective tax amounts that we estimate we would have been required to pay if these incentives had not been available. The per share effect of these tax incentives for the fiscal 2013, fiscal 2012 and fiscal 2011 was $0.35, $0.35 and $0.30, respectively.

Some of our Indian software development centers located in Chandigarh, Chennai, Hyderabad, Mangalore, Mysore, Pune, Trivandrum, Jaipur and Bangalore currently operate in SEZs and many of our proposed development centers are likely to operate in SEZs. If the Government of India changes its policies affecting SEZs in a manner that adversely impacts the incentives for establishing and operating facilities in SEZs, our business, results of operations and financial condition may be adversely affected.

In August 2010, the Direct Taxes Code Bill, 2010 was introduced in the Indian Parliament. The Direct Taxes Code Bill, if enacted, is intended to replace the Indian Income Tax Act. The Direct Taxes Code Bill proposes that while profit-linked tax benefits for existing units in SEZs will continue for the unexpired portions of the applicable tax holiday period, such tax benefits will not be available to new units in SEZs that were notified after March 31, 2012 and will become operational after March 31, 2014.

Further, the Finance Act, 2007, had included income eligible for deductions under Section 10A of the Indian Income Tax Act in the computation of book profits for the levy of a Minimum Alternate Tax, or MAT. Effective April 1, 2011, the Finance Act, 2011 extended MAT to SEZ operating and developer units. Income in respect of which a deduction may be claimed under section 10AA or section 80IAB of the Indian Income Tax Act therefore has to be included in book profits for computing MAT liability. The Finance Act, 2013 has increased the surcharge on income of domestic companies having taxable income above RUPEE SYMBOL100,000,000 from 5% to 10%. This has resulted in the increase in effective MAT rate for such companies to 20.96% from 20.01%. With our growth of business in SEZ units, we may have to compute our tax liability under MAT in future years.

The Income Tax Act provides that the MAT paid by us can be adjusted against our regular tax liability over the next ten years. Although MAT paid by us can be set off against our future tax liability, due to the introduction of MAT, our net income and cash flows for intervening periods could be adversely affected.

The Direct Taxes Code Bill also proposes the rate of MAT to be 20% (including surcharges) on the book profits of domestic companies, and the amounts paid towards MAT are expected to be adjusted against regular tax liability over a fifteen year period.

The expiration, modification or termination of any of our tax benefits or holidays, including on account of non-availability of the SEZ tax holiday scheme pursuant to the enactment of the Direct Taxes Code Bill, would likely increase our effective tax rates significantly. Any increase in our effective tax liability in India could have a material and adverse effect on our net income.

In the event that the Government of India or the government of another country changes its tax policies in a manner that is adverse to us, our tax expense may materially increase, reducing our profitability.

In the Finance Act, 2012, the Government of India proposed to levy service tax based on a negative list of services. Consequently, all services are likely to become taxable, except notified exempted services. Further, the rate of service tax has been increased from 10% to 12%. This would increase the cost of input services. Although currently there are no material pending or threatened claims against us for service taxes, such claims may be asserted against us in the future. Defending these claims would be expensive, time consuming and may divert our management’s attention and resources from operating our business.

Additionally, the Finance Act 2012 adopted the General Anti Avoidance Rules (GAAR). Pursuant to GAAR, an arrangement in which the main purpose, or one of the main purposes, is to obtain a tax benefit may be declared an ‘impermissible avoidance arrangement’ if it also satisfies at least one of the following four tests:
 
(a) The arrangement creates rights and obligations, which are not normally created between parties dealing at arm’s length.
(b) It results in misuse or abuse of provisions of tax laws.
(c) It lacks commercial substance or is deemed to lack commercial substance.
(d) It is carried out in a manner, which is normally not employed for a bona fide purpose.

The procedural and administrative mechanism for the implementation of GAAR is still being finalized. If any of our transactions are found to be impermissible avoidance arrangements under GAAR, our business, financial condition and results of operations may be adversely affected.

The GAAR was originally proposed to become effective on April 1, 2013. Based on the recommendation of a panel which was formed to study proposed GAAR provisions, the GAAR provisions are now proposed to be effective on April 1, 2016.

The Finance Act, 2012 has also made certain retrospective amendments effective June 1, 1976, such as broadening the term ‘royalty’. Any retrospective tax amendments may adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations.

The Finance Act, 2013 has increased the tax withholding rate from 10% to 25% in respect of the payment to be made to non-residents towards "Royalty" and/or "Fees for Technical Services". However, an option to follow a rate prescribed under the applicable Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement has been given subject to fulfillment of prescribed conditions and documentation. As we procure various software licenses and technical services from non-residents in course of delivering our products and services to our clients, the cost of purchase of such software and services may increase for us.

We operate in jurisdictions that impose transfer pricing and other tax-related regulations on us, and any failure to comply could materially and adversely affect our profitability.

We are required to comply with various transfer pricing regulations in India and other countries. Failure to comply with such regulations may impact our effective tax rates and consequently affect our net margins. Additionally, we operate in several countries and our failure to comply with the local and municipal tax regime may result in additional taxes, penalties and enforcement actions from such authorities. In the event that we do not properly comply with transfer pricing and tax-related regulations, our profitability may be adversely affected.

Wage pressures in India and the hiring of employees outside India may prevent us from sustaining our competitive advantage and may reduce our profit margins.

Wage costs in India have historically been significantly lower than wage costs in the United States and Europe for comparably skilled professionals, which has been one of our competitive strengths. Although, currently, a vast majority of our workforce consists of Indian nationals, we expect to increase hiring in other jurisdictions, including the United States and Europe. Any such recruitment of foreign nationals is likely to be at wages higher than those prevailing in India and may increase our operating costs and adversely impact our profitability.

Further, in certain jurisdictions in which we operate, legislation has been adopted that requires our non-resident alien employees working in such jurisdictions to earn the same wages as similarly situated residents or citizens of such jurisdiction. In jurisdictions where this is required, the compensation expenses for our non-resident alien employees would adversely impact our results of operations. For example, recently, the minimum wages for certain work permit holders in the United Kingdom have been increased, thereby increasing the cost of conducting business in that jurisdiction.

Additionally, wage increases in India may prevent us from sustaining this competitive advantage and may negatively affect our profit margins. We have historically experienced significant competition for employees from large multinational companies that have established and continue to establish offshore operations in India, as well as from companies within India. This competition has led to wage pressures in attracting and retaining employees, and these wage pressures have led to a situation where wages in India are increasing at a faster rate than in the United States, which could result in increased costs for companies seeking to employ technology professionals in India, particularly project managers and other mid-level professionals. We may need to increase our employee compensation more rapidly than in the past to remain competitive with other employers, or seek to recruit in other low labor cost jurisdictions to keep our wage costs low. For example, we established a long term retention bonus policy for our senior executives and employees. Under this policy, certain senior executives and employees will be entitled to a yearly cash bonus upon their continued employment with us based upon seniority, their role in the company and their performance. Typically, we undertake an annual compensation review, and, pursuant to such review, the average salaries of our employees have increased significantly. Any compensation increases in the future may result in a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition. In certain years, we may not give wage increases due to adverse market conditions while our competitors may still give wage increases. This may result in higher attrition rates and may impact our ability to hire the best talent.

Terrorist attacks or a war could adversely affect our business, results of operations and financial condition.

Terrorist attacks, such as the attacks of September 11, 2001 in the United States, the attacks of July 25, 2008 in Bangalore, the attacks of November 26 to 29, 2008 and July 13, 2011 in Mumbai and other acts of violence or war, such as the continuing conflict in Afghanistan, have the potential to directly impact our clients or us. To the extent that such attacks affect or involve the United States or Europe, our business may be significantly impacted, as the majority of our revenues are derived from clients located in the United States and Europe. In addition, such attacks may destabilize the economic and political situation in India, may make travel more difficult, may make it more difficult to obtain work visas for many of our technology professionals who are required to work in the United States or Europe, and may effectively reduce our ability to deliver our services to our clients. Such obstacles to business may increase our expenses and negatively affect the results of our operations. Furthermore, any attacks in India could cause a disruption in the delivery of our services to our clients, and could have a negative impact on our business, personnel, assets and results of operations, and could cause our clients or potential clients to choose other vendors for the services we provide. Terrorist threats, attacks or war could make travel more difficult, may disrupt our ability to provide services to our clients and could delay, postpone or cancel our clients’ decisions to use our services.

Regional conflicts in South Asia could adversely affect the Indian economy, disrupt our operations and cause our business to suffer.

South Asia has, from time to time, experienced instances of civil unrest and hostilities among neighboring countries, including between India and Pakistan. In recent years, there have been military confrontations between India and Pakistan that have occurred in the region of Kashmir and along the India-Pakistan border. Further, in recent months, Pakistan has been experiencing significant instability and this has heightened the risks of conflict in South Asia. Military activity or terrorist attacks in the future could influence the Indian economy by disrupting communications and making travel more difficult and such political tensions could create a greater perception that investments in Indian companies involve higher degrees of risk. This, in turn, could have a material adverse effect on the market for securities of Indian companies, including our equity shares and our ADSs, and on the market for our services.

Changes in the policies of the Government of India or political instability could delay the further liberalization of the Indian economy and adversely affect economic conditions in India generally, which could impact our business and prospects.

Since 1991, successive Indian governments have pursued policies of economic liberalization, including significantly relaxing restrictions on the private sector. Nevertheless, the role of the Central and State governments in the Indian economy as producers, consumers and regulators has remained significant. The current Government of India, formed in May 2009, has announced policies and taken initiatives that support the continued economic liberalization policies pursued by previous governments. However, these liberalization policies may not continue in the future. The rate of economic liberalization could change, and specific laws and policies affecting technology companies, foreign investment, currency exchange and other matters affecting investment in our securities could change as well. A significant change in India’s economic liberalization and deregulation policies could adversely affect business and economic conditions in India generally, and our business in particular.

Some of our software development centers located at Chandigarh, Chennai, Hyderabad, Mangalore, Mysore, Pune, Trivandrum, Bangalore and Jaipur currently operate in SEZs and many of our proposed development centers are likely to operate in SEZs. If the Government of India changes its policies affecting SEZs in a manner that adversely impact the incentives for establishing and operating facilities in SEZs, our business, results of operations and financial condition may be adversely affected.

Political instability could also delay the reform of the Indian economy and could have a material adverse effect on the market for securities of Indian companies, including our equity shares and our ADSs, and on the market for our services.

Our international expansion plans subject us to risks inherent in doing business internationally.

Currently, we have global development centers in 23 countries around the world, with our largest development centers located in India. We have recently established or intend to establish new development facilities. During fiscal 2010, Infosys BPO acquired 100% of the voting interest in McCamish Systems LLC, a business process solutions provider based in Atlanta, Georgia, in the United States. In fiscal 2010, we established a wholly owned subsidiary, Infosys Tecnologia do Brasil Ltda in Brazil to provide information technology services in Latin America. Further, during fiscal 2010, we formed Infosys Public Services, Inc. to focus on governmental outsourcing and consulting in the United States and in fiscal 2011, we formed Infosys Technologies (Shanghai) Company Limited to further expand our operations in China. In fiscal 2012, Infosys BPO completed the acquisition of Portland Group Pty Ltd., a leading provider of strategic sourcing and category management services based in Australia. In fiscal 2013, Infosys Limited completed the acquisition of Lodestone Holding AG, a global management consultancy firm.

We also have a very large workforce spread across our various offices worldwide. As of March 31, 2013, we employed approximately 156,000 employees worldwide, and approximately 36,500 of those employees were located outside of India. Because of our global presence, we are subject to additional risks related to our international expansion strategy, including risks related to compliance with a wide variety of treaties, national and local laws, including multiple and possibly overlapping tax regimes, privacy laws and laws dealing with data protection, export control laws, restrictions on the import and export of certain technologies and national and local labor laws dealing with immigration, employee health and safety, and wages and benefits, applicable to our employees located in our various international offices and facilities. We may from time to time be subject to litigation or administrative actions resulting from claims against us by current or former employees, individually or as part of a class action, including for claims of wrongful termination, discrimination (including on grounds of nationality, ethnicity, race, faith, gender, marital status, age or disability), misclassification, payment of redundancy payments under TUPE-type legislation, or other violations of labor laws, or other alleged conduct. Our being held liable for unpaid compensation, redundancy payments, statutory penalties, and other damages arising out of such actions and litigations could adversely affect our revenues and operating profitability. For example, in December 2007, we entered into a voluntary settlement with the California Division of Labor Standards Enforcement regarding the potential misclassification of certain of our current and former employees, whereby we agreed to pay overtime wages that may have been owed to such employees. The total settlement amount was approximately $26 million, including penalties and taxes.

In addition, we may face competition in other countries from companies that may have more experience with operations in such countries or with international operations generally. We may also face difficulties integrating new facilities in different countries into our existing operations, as well as integrating employees that we hire in different countries into our existing corporate culture. As an international company, our offshore and onsite operations may also be impacted by disease, epidemics and local political instability. For instance, some of the regions in which we operate, including North Africa, have experienced political instability in recent times, which required us to temporarily redeploy some of our personnel and property from those regions. Political instability in the regions in which we operate could have a material adverse effect on revenues and profitability.

Our international expansion plans may not be successful and we may not be able to compete effectively in other countries. Any of these events could adversely affect our revenues and operating profitability.

It may be difficult for holders of our ADSs to enforce any judgment obtained in the United States against us or our affiliates.

We are incorporated under the laws of India and many of our directors and executive officers reside outside the United States. Virtually all of our assets are located outside the United States. As a result, holders of our ADSs may be unable to effect service of process upon us outside the United States. In addition, holders of our ADSs may be unable to enforce judgments against us if such judgments are obtained in courts of the United States, including judgments predicated solely upon the federal securities laws of the United States.

The United States and India do not currently have a treaty providing for reciprocal recognition and enforcement of judgments (other than arbitration awards) in civil and commercial matters. Therefore, a final judgment for the payment of money rendered by any federal or state court in the United States on the basis of civil liability, whether or not predicated solely upon the federal securities laws of the United States, would not be enforceable in India. However, the party in whose favor such final judgment is rendered may bring a new suit in a competent court in India based on a final judgment that has been obtained in the United States. 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. 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 approval from the Reserve Bank of India under the Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999, to repatriate any amount recovered pursuant to the execution of such a judgment.

Holders of ADSs are subject to the Securities and Exchange Board of India’s Takeover Code with respect to their acquisitions of ADSs or the underlying equity shares, and this may impose requirements on such holders with respect to disclosure and offers to purchase additional ADSs or equity shares.

The Securities and Exchange Board of India (Substantial Acquisition of Shares and Takeovers) Regulations, 2011 (the Takeover Code) is applicable to publicly listed Indian companies. Therefore, the provisions of the Takeover Code apply to us and to any person acquiring our equity shares or voting rights in our company, such as those represented by our ADSs.

Upon the acquisition of shares or voting rights in a publicly listed Indian company such that the aggregate share-holding of the acquirer (meaning a person who directly or indirectly, acquires or agrees to acquire shares or voting rights in a target company, or acquires or agrees to acquire control over the target company, either by himself or together with any person acting in concert) is 5% or more of the shares of the company, the acquirer is required, within two working days of such acquisition, to disclose the aggregate shareholding and voting rights in the company to the company and to the stock exchanges in which the shares of the company are listed.

Further, an acquirer who, together with persons acting in concert with him, holds shares or voting rights entitling them to 5% or more of the shares or voting rights in a target company, acquires or sells shares representing 2% or more of the shares or voting rights of the company must disclose, within two working days of such acquisition, sale or receipt of intimation of allotment of such shares, the acquirer's revised shareholding to the company and to the stock exchanges on which the shares of the company are listed. This disclosure is required, in case of a sale, even if such sale results in the shareholding of the acquirer falling below 5%

The Takeover Code may impose conditions that discourage a potential acquirer, which could prevent an acquisition of our company in a transaction that could be beneficial for our equity holders.

The laws of India do not protect intellectual property rights to the same extent as those of the United States, and we may be unsuccessful in protecting our intellectual property rights. We may also be subject to third party claims of intellectual property infringement.

We rely on a combination of patent, copyright, trademark and design laws, trade secrets, confidentiality procedures and contractual provisions to protect our intellectual property. However, the laws of India do not protect proprietary rights to the same extent as laws in the United States. Therefore, our efforts to protect our intellectual property may not be adequate. Our competitors may independently develop similar technology or duplicate our products or services. Unauthorized parties may infringe upon or misappropriate our products, services or proprietary information.

The misappropriation or duplication of our intellectual property could disrupt our ongoing business, distract our management and employees, reduce our revenues and increase our expenses. We may need to litigate to enforce our intellectual property rights or to determine the validity and scope of the proprietary rights of others. Any such litigation could be time consuming and costly. As the number of patents, copyrights and other intellectual property rights in our industry increases, and as the coverage of these rights increases, we believe that companies in our industry will face more frequent infringement claims. Defense against these claims, even if such claims are not meritorious, could be expensive and time consuming and may divert our management’s attention and resources from operating our company. From time to time, third parties have asserted, and may in the future assert, patent, copyright, trademark and other intellectual property rights against us or our customers. Our business partners may have similar claims asserted against them. A number of third parties, including companies with greater resources than us, have asserted patent rights to technologies that we utilize in our business. If we become liable to third parties for infringing their intellectual property rights, we could be required to pay a substantial damage award and be forced to develop non-infringing technology, obtain a license or cease selling the applications or products that contain the infringing technology. We may be unable to develop non-infringing technology or to obtain a license on commercially reasonable terms, or at all. An unfavorable outcome in connection with any infringement claim against us as a result of litigation, other proceeding or settlement, could have a material and adverse impact on our business, results of operations and financial position.

Our ability to acquire companies organized outside India depends on the approval of the Government of India and/or the Reserve Bank of India, and failure to obtain this approval could negatively impact our business.

Generally, the Reserve Bank of India must approve any acquisition by us of any company organized outside of India. The Reserve Bank of India permits acquisitions of companies organized outside of India by an Indian party without approval if the transaction consideration is paid in cash, the transaction value does not exceed 400% of the net worth of the acquiring company as of the date of the acquiring company’s latest audited balance sheet, or if the acquisition is funded with cash from the acquiring company’s existing foreign currency accounts or with cash proceeds from the issuance of ADRs/GDRs.

It is possible that any required approval from the Reserve Bank of India or any other government agency may not be obtained. Our failure to obtain approvals for acquisitions of companies organized outside India may restrict our international growth, which could negatively affect our business and prospects.

Indian laws limit our ability to raise capital outside India and may limit the ability of others to acquire us, which could prevent us from operating our business or entering into a transaction that is in the best interests of our shareholders.

Indian law relating to foreign exchange management constrains our ability to raise capital outside India through the issuance of equity or convertible debt securities. Generally, any foreign investment in, or acquisition of, an Indian company does not require the approval from relevant government authorities in India, including the Reserve Bank of India. However, in a number of industrial sectors, there are restrictions on foreign investment in Indian companies. Changes to the policies may create restrictions on our capital raising abilities. For example, a limit on the foreign equity ownership of Indian technology companies or pricing restrictions on the issuance of ADRs/GDRs may constrain our ability to seek and obtain additional equity investment by foreign investors. In addition, these restrictions, if applied to us, may prevent us from entering into certain transactions, such as an acquisition by a non-Indian company, which might otherwise be beneficial for us and the holders of our equity shares and ADSs.

Risks Related to the ADSs

Historically, our ADSs have traded at a significant premium to the trading prices of our underlying equity shares, and may not continue to do so in the future.

Historically, our ADSs have traded at a premium to the trading prices of our underlying equity shares on the Indian stock exchanges. We believe that this price premium has resulted from the relatively small portion of our market capitalization previously represented by ADSs, restrictions imposed by Indian law on the conversion of equity shares into ADSs and an apparent preference of some investors to trade dollar-denominated securities. We have already completed three secondary ADS offerings and the completion of any additional secondary ADS offering will significantly increase the number of our outstanding ADSs. Also, over time, some of the restrictions on the issuance of ADSs imposed by Indian law have been relaxed and we expect that other restrictions may be relaxed in the future. As a result, the historical premium enjoyed by ADSs as compared to equity shares may be reduced or eliminated upon the completion of any additional secondary offering of our ADSs or similar transactions in the future, a change in Indian law permitting further conversion of equity shares into ADSs or changes in investor preferences.

In the past several years, a significant number of our ADSs have been converted into equity shares in India as the premium on ADSs compared to equity shares has significantly narrowed. If a substantial amount of our ADSs are converted into underlying equity shares in India, it could affect the liquidity of such ADSs on the NYSE and could impact the price of our ADSs.

Sales of our equity shares may adversely affect the prices of our equity shares and ADSs.

Sales of substantial amounts of our equity shares, including sales by our insiders in the public market, or the perception that such sales may occur, could adversely affect the prevailing market price of our equity shares or the ADSs or our ability to raise capital through an offering of our securities. In the future, we may also sponsor the sale of shares currently held by some of our shareholders as we have done in the past, or issue new shares. We can make no prediction as to the timing of any such sales or the effect, if any, that future sales of our equity shares, or the availability of our equity shares for future sale, will have on the market price of our equity shares or ADSs prevailing from time to time.

Negative media coverage and public scrutiny may adversely affect the prices of our equity shares and ADSs.

Media coverage and public scrutiny of our business practices, policies and actions has increased dramatically over the past several years, particularly through the use of Internet forums and blogs. Any negative media coverage in relation to our business, regardless of the factual basis for the assertions being made, may adversely impact our reputation. Responding to allegations made in the media may be time consuming and could divert the time and attention of our senior management from our business. Any unfavorable publicity may also adversely impact investor confidence and result in sales of our equity shares and ADSs, which may lead to a decline in the share price of our equity shares and our ADSs.

Indian law imposes certain restrictions that limit a holder’s ability to transfer the equity shares obtained upon conversion of ADSs and repatriate the proceeds of such transfer which may cause our ADSs to trade at a premium or discount to the market price of our equity shares.

Under certain circumstances, the Reserve Bank of India must approve the sale of equity shares underlying ADSs by a non-resident of India to a resident of India. The Reserve Bank of India has given general permission to effect sales of existing shares or convertible debentures of an Indian company by a resident to a non-resident, subject to certain conditions, including the price at which the shares may be sold. Additionally, except under certain limited circumstances, if an investor seeks to convert the rupee proceeds from a sale of equity shares in India into foreign currency and then repatriate that foreign currency from India, he or she will have to obtain Reserve Bank of India approval for each such transaction. Required approval from the Reserve Bank of India or any other government agency may not be obtained on terms favorable to a non-resident investor or at all.

An investor in our ADSs may not be able to exercise preemptive rights for additional shares and may thereby suffer dilution of such investor’s equity interest in us.

Under the Companies Act, 1956, or the Indian Companies Act, a company incorporated in India must offer its holders of equity shares preemptive rights to subscribe and pay for a proportionate number of shares to maintain their existing ownership percentages prior to the issuance of any new equity shares, unless such preemptive rights have been waived by three-fourths of the shareholders voting on the resolution to waive such rights. Holders of ADSs may be unable to exercise preemptive rights for equity shares underlying ADSs unless a registration statement under the Securities Act of 1933 as amended, or the Securities Act, is effective with respect to such rights or an exemption from the registration requirements of the Securities Act is available. We are not obligated to prepare and file such a registration statement and our decision to do so will depend on the costs and potential liabilities associated with any such registration statement, as well as the perceived benefits of enabling the holders of ADSs to exercise their preemptive rights, and any other factors we consider appropriate at the time. No assurance can be given that we would file a registration statement under these circumstances. If we issue any such securities in the future, such securities may be issued to the Depositary, which may sell such securities for the benefit of the holders of the ADSs. There can be no assurance as to the value, if any, the Depositary would receive upon the sale of such securities. To the extent that holders of ADSs are unable to exercise preemptive rights granted in respect of the equity shares represented by their ADSs, their proportional interests in us would be reduced.

ADS holders may be restricted in their ability to exercise voting rights.

At our request, the Depositary will electronically mail to holders of our ADSs any notice of shareholders’ meeting received from us together with information explaining how to instruct the Depositary to exercise the voting rights of the securities represented by ADSs. If the Depositary receives voting instructions from a holder of our ADSs in time, relating to matters that have been forwarded to such holder, it will endeavor to vote the securities represented by such holder’s 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 securities on deposit. We cannot assure that holders of our ADSs will receive voting materials in time to enable such holders to return voting instructions to the Depositary in a timely manner. Securities for which no voting instructions have been received will not be voted. There may be other communications, notices or offerings that we only make to holders of our equity shares, which will not be forwarded to holders of ADSs. Accordingly, holders of our ADSs may not be able to participate in all offerings, transactions or votes that are made available to holders of our equity shares.

Item 4. Information on the Company
 
COMPANY OVERVIEW

Infosys provides business consulting, technology, engineering and outsourcing services to help clients in over thirty countries to build tomorrow’s enterprise.
Our comprehensive end-to-end business solutions include:
Our professionals deliver high quality solutions through our Global Delivery Model. Using our Global Delivery Model, we divide projects into components that we execute simultaneously at client sites and at our development centers in India and around the world. We optimize our cost structure by maintaining the flexibility to execute project components where it is most cost effective. Our Global Delivery Model, with its scalable infrastructure and ability to execute project components around the clock and across time zones, enables us to reduce project delivery times.

We have organized our sales, marketing and business development departments into teams that focus on specific geographies and industries, enabling us to better customize our service offerings to our clients’ needs. Our primary geographic markets are the Americas, Europe, Asia Pacific (APAC) and Middle East and Africa (MEA) regions. We serve clients in financial services and insurance, manufacturing, energy, utilities, communications and services, retail, consumer packaged goods, logistics and life sciences, healthcare and public services.

Our revenues grew from $4,663 million in fiscal 2009 to $7,398 million in fiscal 2013, representing an compound annualized growth of 12.2%. Our net income grew from $1,281 million to $1,725 million during the same period, representing an compound annualized growth of 7.7%. Between March 31, 2009 and March 31, 2013, our total employees grew from approximately 104,900 to approximately 156,000, representing a compound annualized growth rate of approximately 10.4%.
 
We believe we have some of the best talent in the technology services industry, and we are committed to remaining among the industry’s leading employers.
 
We were incorporated on July 2, 1981 in Maharashtra, India, as Infosys Consultants Private Limited, a private limited company under the Indian Companies Act, 1956. We changed our name to Infosys Technologies Private Limited in April 1992, to Infosys Technologies Limited in June 1992, when we became a public limited company. In June 2011, we changed our name from Infosys Technologies Limited to Infosys Limited, following approval of the name change by our Board, shareholders and the Indian regulatory authorities. The name change was intended to reflect our transition from a provider of technology services to a partner with our clients solving business problems by leveraging technology. We completed our initial public offering of equity shares in India in 1993 and our initial public offering of ADSs in the United States in 1999. In August 2003, June 2005 and November 2006, we completed sponsored secondary offerings of ADSs in the United States on behalf of our shareholders. Our 2005 and 2006 offerings also each included a public offering without listing in Japan, or POWL. In 2008, we were selected as an original component member of 'The Global Dow', a world-wide stock index made up of 150 leading blue-chip stocks. Following our voluntary delisting from the NASDAQ Global Select Market on December 11, 2012, we began trading of our ADSs on the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) on December 12, 2012, under the ticker symbol INFY. On February 20, 2013, we listed our ADSs on NYSE Euronext's (NYX) London and Paris markets, under the ticker symbol INFY. In fiscal 2013, we also completed the acquisition of Lodestone Holding AG, a global management consultancy firm based in Switzerland.
 
Infosys BPO Limited (Infosys BPO) is our majority-owned and controlled subsidiary. Infosys Technologies (Australia) Pty. Limited (Infosys Australia), Infosys Technologia do Brazil Ltda (Infosys Brazil), Infosys Technologies (China) Co. Limited (Infosys China), Infosys Consulting India Limited, Infosys Technologies S. de R. L. de C.V (Infosys Mexico), Infosys Technologies (Sweden) AB (Infosys Sweden), Infosys Public Services, Infosys Technologies (Shanghai) Co. Limited (Infosys Shanghai) and Lodestone Holding AG (Infosys Lodestone) are our wholly-owned and controlled subsidiaries.

The address of our registered office is Electronics City, Hosur Road, Bangalore-560 100, Karnataka, India. The telephone number of our registered office is +91-80-2852-0261. Our agent for service of process in the United States is CT Corporation System, 1350 Treat Boulevard, Suite 100, Walnut Creek, CA 94597-2152. Our website address is www.infosys.com and the information contained in our website does not constitute a part of this Annual Report.
 
Principal Capital Expenditures and Divestitures
 
In fiscal 2013, 2012 and 2011, we spent $382 million, $301 million and $285 million, respectively, on capital expenditure. As of March 31, 2013, we had contractual commitments of approximately $312 million for capital expenditure. These commitments included approximately $192 million in domestic purchases and $120 million in imports and overseas commitments for hardware, supplies and services. All our capital expenditures were financed out of cash generated from operations.

On February 21, 2011, we incorporated a wholly owned subsidiary Infosys Technologies (Shanghai) Company Limited.

During the year ended March 31, 2011, Infosys BPO (Thailand) Limited was liquidated.

On October 7, 2011, the board of directors of Infosys Consulting Inc., approved the termination and winding down of the entity, and entered into an assignment and assumption agreement with Infosys Limited. The termination of Infosys Consulting Inc., became effective on January 12, 2012, in accordance with the Texas Business Organizations Code.  Effective January 12, 2012, the assets and liabilities of Infosys Consulting Inc., were transferred to Infosys Limited.

On January 4, 2012, Infosys BPO acquired 100% of the voting interest in Portland Group Pty Ltd a strategic sourcing and category management services provider based in Australia. This business acquisition was conducted by entering into a share sale agreement for a cash consideration of $41 million.
 
On October 22, 2012, we acquired 100% of the voting interests in Lodestone Holding AG, a global management consultancy firm headquartered in Zurich, Switzerland. The business acquisition was conducted by entering into a share purchase agreement for a cash consideration of $219 million and an additional consideration of up to $112 million, which we refer to as deferred purchase price, payable to the selling shareholders of Lodestone Holding AG who are continuously employed or otherwise engaged by us or our subsidiaries during the three year period following the date of the acquisition.
 
INDUSTRY OVERVIEW

Changing economic and business conditions, evolving consumer preferences, rapid technological innovation and adoption and globalization are creating an increasingly competitive market environment that is driving corporations to transform the manner in which they operate. Companies in this environment are now focusing even more on their core business objectives, such as revenue growth, profitability and asset efficiency.

Technology has evolved from merely driving cost efficiency – technology is now also driving tangible business value. The ability to define, design, develop, implement and maintain advanced technology platforms and business solutions to address business needs has become a competitive advantage and a priority for corporations worldwide.

As a result, there is an increasing need for highly skilled professionals in the market to help corporations transform their business, optimize operations and drive innovation by leveraging technology. At the same time, enterprises are reluctant to expand their internal IT departments and increase costs. These factors have led to the increased reliance of corporations on their outsourcing providers and are expected to continue to drive future growth for outsourced technology services.

Corporations are increasingly turning to offshore service providers to meet their need for higher quality, cost competitive technology solutions. As a result, offshore service providers have become critical to the operations of many enterprises and these service providers continue to grow in recognition and sophistication. In view of this, the addressable market for offshore technology services has expanded.

The India Advantage

India is widely recognized as the premier destination for offshore technology services. According to the NASSCOM Strategic Review 2013 , IT services exports (excluding exports relating to business process management (BPM), hardware, engineering design and product development) from India are estimated to grow by 9.9% over fiscal 2012, to record revenues of $43.9 billion. According to the NASSCOM Strategic Review 2013, BPM exports from India are estimated to record revenues of $17.8 billion, which is a growth of over 12.2% compared to fiscal 2012. There are several key factors contributing to the growth of IT and IT-enabled services (ITES) in India and by Indian companies.

High Quality Delivery. According to the Process Maturity Profile published by the Carnegie Mellon Software Engineering Institute in September 2012, only 5.4% of 5159 organizations most recently appraised are operating at Level 5, which is the highest level of the CMMi assessment. Out of 581 organizations appraised recently in India, 139 companies are at SEI-CMMi Level 5, higher than any other country in the world. SEI-CMMi is the Carnegie Mellon Software Engineering Institute’s Capability Maturity Model, which assesses the quality of organizations’ management system processes and methodologies.

Significant Cost Benefits. The NASSCOM Strategic Review 2012 indicates that India offers the lowest cost of delivery as compared to other offshore locations, with certain cities in India offering savings of approximately 50%–80% over source locations.

Abundant Skilled Resources. India has a large and highly skilled English-speaking labor pool. According to the NASSCOM Strategic Review 2012, approximately 4.5 million students are expected to graduate from Indian universities in fiscal 2012, including approximately 917,000 graduates with technical and post-graduate degrees.

The factors described above also make India the premier destination for services such as business process management. While these advantages apply to many companies with offshore capabilities in India, we believe that there are additional factors critical to a successful, sustainable and scalable technology services business. These factors include the ability to:
Evolution of Technology Outsourcing

The nature of technology outsourcing is changing. Historically, enterprises either outsourced their technology requirements entirely or on a standalone project-by-project basis. In an environment of rapid technological change, globalization and regulatory changes, the complete outsourcing model is often perceived to limit a company’s operational flexibility and not fully deliver potential cost savings and efficiency benefits. Similarly, project-by-project outsourcing is also perceived to result in increased operational risk and coordination costs and as failing to fully leverage technology service providers’ full ranges of capabilities. To address these issues, companies are looking at outsourcing approaches that require their technology service providers to develop specialized systems, processes and solutions along with cost-effective delivery capabilities.

OUR COMPETITIVE STRENGTHS

We believe our competitive strengths include:

Leadership in sophisticated solutions that enable clients to deliver improved business results in addition to optimizing the efficiency of their business. We bring together our expertise in consulting, IT services and business process management to create solutions that allow our clients to transform their business, optimize operations and drive innovation, thus making them more competitive in their market. Our suite of comprehensive, end-to-end business solutions that leverage technology enables us to offer services through our broad network of relationships, increase our dialogue with key decision makers within each client, and increase the points of sale for new clients. As a result, we believe we are able to capture a greater share of our clients’ budgets. Our suite of business solutions includes business and technology consulting, enterprise solutions, systems integration, custom application development, application maintenance and production support, infrastructure management, independent testing and validation, product engineering and lifecycle solutions, business process management, software products, business platforms and solutions.

Proven Global Delivery Model We have a highly evolved Global Delivery Model, which enables us to take work to the location where the best talent is available and to where it makes the best economic sense with the least amount of acceptable risk. Over the last thirty years, we have developed our onsite and offshore execution capabilities to deliver high quality and scalable services. In doing so, we have made substantial investments in our processes, infrastructure and systems and have refined our Global Delivery Model to effectively integrate onsite and offshore technology services. Our Global Delivery Model provides clients with seamless, high quality solutions in reduced timeframes, enabling our clients to achieve operating efficiencies. To address changing industry dynamics, we are continuously refining our Global Delivery Model. Through our Modular Global Sourcing framework, we assist clients in segmenting their internal business processes and applications and outsourcing these segments selectively on a modular basis to reduce risk and cost and to increase operational flexibility. We believe that this approach enables us to retain our leadership position in the industry.

Commitment to Quality and Process Execution. We have developed a new integrated engineering methodology, enabling improved execution capabilities along with our own sophisticated project and program management. We have also developed a service management methodology to enable timely, consistent and accurate delivery of superior quality solutions to maintain a high level of client satisfaction. We benchmark our services and processes against globally recognized quality standards. Infosys BPO has been certified for eSCM – SP v. 2.0 Level 5, the eSourcing Capability Model for service providers developed by a consortium led by Carnegie Mellon University’s Information Technology Services Qualification Center. Infosys Limited and Infosys BPO are certified for ISO 22301: 2012 Societal Security, Business Continuity Management Systems standards. We continue to demonstrate process excellence by adhering to various international quality standards certifications, including ISO 9001: 2008, ISO 27001, ISO 20000, AS EN 9100, TL 9000-SV, OHSAS 18001 and ISO 14001. We have also received an independent auditors assurance report on compliance to ISAE 3402/SSAE16 and a certification of compliance on PCIDSS V 2.0 for Infosys BPO.

Strong Brand and Long-Standing Client Relationships. We have long-standing relationships with large multinational corporations built on successful prior engagements with them. Our track record of delivering high quality solutions across the entire software life cycle and our strong domain expertise helps us to solidify these relationships and gain increased business from our existing clients. As a result, we have a history of client retention and derive a significant proportion of revenues from repeat clients.

Status as an Employer of Choice. We believe we have some of the best talent in the Indian technology services industry and we are committed to remaining among the industry’s leading employers. We have a presence in 12 cities in India, allowing us to recruit technology professionals with specific geographic preferences. Our diverse workforce includes employees of 100 nationalities. Our training programs ensure that new hires enhance their skills in alignment with our requirements and are readily deployable upon completion of their training programs.

Ability to Scale. We have successfully managed our growth by investing in infrastructure and by rapidly recruiting, training and deploying new professionals. We currently have 87 global development centers, the majority of which are located in India. We also have development centers in various countries including Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, Japan, Mauritius, Mexico, Poland, Philippines and at multiple locations in the United States and Europe. Our financial position allows us to make the investments in infrastructure and personnel required to continue growing our business. We can rapidly deploy resources and execute new projects through the scalable network of our global delivery centers. Between March 31, 2008 and March 31, 2013, our total employees grew from approximately 91,200 to approximately 156,000.

Innovation and Leadership. We are a pioneer in the technology services industry. We were one of the first Indian companies to achieve a number of significant milestones, which has enhanced our reputation in the marketplace. For example, we were one of the first companies to develop and deploy a global delivery model and attain SEI-CMMI Level 5 certification for both our offshore and onsite operations. In addition, we were the first Indian company to be listed on a U.S. stock exchange, and we were also the first Indian company to complete a POWL (Public Offer Without Listing) in Japan. In 2008, we were selected as an original component member of 'The Global Dow', a world-wide stock index made up of 150 leading blue-chip stocks. Following our voluntary delisting from the NASDAQ Global Select Market on December 11, 2012, we began trading of our ADSs on the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) on December 12, 2012, under the ticker symbol INFY. On February 20, 2013, we listed our ADSs on NYSE Euronext's (NYX) London and Paris markets, under the ticker symbol INFY.
 
OUR STRATEGY

We seek to further strengthen our position as a leading global consulting and technology company by:
To achieve these goals, we seek to:

Increase Business from Existing and New Clients. Our goal is to build enduring relationships with both existing and new clients. With existing clients, we aim to expand the nature and scope of our engagements by increasing the size and number of projects and extending the breadth of our service offerings. For new clients, we seek to provide value-added solutions by leveraging our in-depth industry expertise and expanding the breadth of services offered to them beyond those in the initial engagement. We also seek to increase our recurring business with existing clients by providing product engineering, maintenance, infrastructure management and business process management services which are long-term in nature and require frequent client contact. In order to further improve our business generation capabilities, we have established a Strategic Global Sourcing Group, which is comprised of senior professionals, and seeks to identify, secure and manage new, large, and long-term client engagements.

Continue to Enhance our Engagement Models and Offerings. We seek to continually enhance our portfolio of solutions as a means of developing and growing our business. To differentiate our services, we focus on emerging trends, new technologies, specific industries and pervasive business issues that confront our clients. In the changing world of today, many opportunities are closely linked with advances in IT. In our endeavor to assist our clients in taking advantage of business and technological change, we have identified seven key drivers—digital consumers, emerging economies, sustainable tomorrow, smarter organizations, new commerce, pervasive computing and healthcare economy. We believe that realizing the full potential of these drivers is important for tomorrow’s enterprise to forge ahead of its competition. We have aligned our offerings to enable our clients to take advantage of these trends. In 2011, we internally re-organized our offerings into consulting and systems integration, business IT services and products, and platforms and solutions. By categorizing our offerings this way, we believe we will be able to engage with clients across their key areas of investment: transformation, optimization and innovation. We have also extended our capability into areas such as cloud computing, enterprise mobility and sustainability.

Expand Geographically. We seek to selectively expand our global presence to enhance our ability to serve clients. We plan to accomplish this by establishing new sales and marketing offices, representative offices and global development centers to expand our geographical reach. We intend to further increase our presence in China through Infosys China and Infosys Shanghai, in the Czech Republic and Eastern Europe directly and through Infosys BPO, in Australia directly and through Infosys BPO, in Latin America through Infosys Brazil and Infosys Mexico and in Europe directly and through Infosys Lodestone. We intend to use our operations in these regions to eventually support clients in the local market as well as our global clients.

Continue to Develop Deep Industry Knowledge. We intend to continue to build specialized industry expertise in the financial services and insurance, manufacturing, energy, utilities, communications and services, retail, consumer packaged goods, logistics, life sciences, healthcare and public services industries. We combine deep industry knowledge with an understanding of our clients’ needs and technologies to provide high value, quality services. Our industry expertise can be leveraged to assist clients throughout an industry, thereby improving quality and reducing the cost of services to our clients. We will continue to build on our extensive industry expertise and we plan to provide our services to new industries in the future.

Pursue Alliances and Strategic Acquisitions. We intend to continue to develop alliances that complement our core competencies. Our alliance strategy is targeted at partnering with leading technology providers, which allows us to take advantage of emerging technologies in a mutually beneficial and cost-competitive manner. We also intend to selectively pursue acquisitions that augment our existing expertise, client base or geographical presence. For example, in fiscal 2013, we completed the acquisition of Lodestone Holding AG, a global management consultancy firm based in Switzerland. In fiscal 2012, we completed the acquisition of Portland Group Pty Ltd., a strategic sourcing and procurement management services provider based in Australia.

Enhance Brand Visibility. We intend to continue to invest in the development of our premium brand identity in the marketplace. Our branding efforts include participating in media and industry analyst events, sponsorship of, and participation in, targeted industry conferences, trade shows, recruiting efforts, community outreach programs and investor relations. We have instituted the ACM-Infosys Foundation Award jointly with the Association of Computing Machinery, or ACM, for the recognition of young scientists and system developers whose innovations have an impact on the computing field. Additionally, the Infosys Science Foundation has instituted an annual award to honor outstanding achievements of researchers and scientists across six categories: Engineering and Computer Sciences, Humanities, Life Sciences, Mathematical Sciences, Physical Sciences and Social Sciences. We believe that a strong and recognizable Infosys brand will continue to facilitate the new-business lead generation process and enhance our ability to attract talented personnel globally.

Continue to Invest in Infrastructure and Employees. We intend to continue to invest in physical and technological infrastructure to support our growing worldwide development and sales operations and to increase our productivity. To enhance our ability to hire and successfully deploy increasingly greater numbers of technology professionals, we intend to continue investing in recruiting, training and maintaining a challenging and rewarding work environment. During fiscal 2013, we received approximately 379,000 employment applications, interviewed approximately 48,100 applicants and extended offers of employment to approximately 27,300 applicants. These statistics do not include Infosys BPO or our other subsidiaries. We also have constructed an employee training facility, the Infosys Global Education Center, in our campus in Mysore, India to further enhance our employee training capabilities.
 
OUR GLOBAL DELIVERY MODEL

Our Global Delivery Model allows us to take work to the location where the best talent is available and to where it makes the best economic sense with the least amount of acceptable risk. Our Global Delivery Model enables us to derive maximum benefit from:
In a typical offshore development project, we assign a team of our technology professionals to visit a client’s site to determine the scope and requirements of the project. Once the initial specifications of the project have been established, our project managers return to the relevant global development center to supervise a larger team of technology professionals dedicated to the development or implementation of the solution. Typically, a small team remains at the client’s site to manage project coordination and address changes in requirements as the project progresses. Teams return to the client’s site when necessary to ensure seamless integration. To the extent required, a dedicated team provides ongoing maintenance from our global development centers. The client’s systems are linked to our facilities enabling simultaneous processing in our global development centers. Our model ensures that project managers remain in control of execution throughout the life of the project regardless of their geographical location.

We have successfully executed projects at all of our global development centers. We have 87 global development centers, of which 32 are located in India, 17 are in North and South America, 22 are in the Asia-Pacific region and 16 are in Europe. Our largest development centers are located in India. Approximately 73.3% of the total billed person-months for our services rendered during fiscal 2013 originated from our global development centers in India, with the balance efforts being rendered at client sites and our global development centers located outside India.

Our quality control processes and programs are designed to minimize defects and ensure adherence to pre-determined project parameters. Additionally, software quality advisors help individual teams establish appropriate processes for projects and adhere to multi-level testing plans. The project manager is responsible for tracking metrics, including actual effort spent versus initial estimates, project budgeting and estimating the remainder of efforts required on a project.

Our Global Delivery Model mitigates risks associated with providing offshore technology services to our clients. For our communications needs, we use multiple service providers and a mix of terrestrial and optical fiber links with alternate routing. In India, we rely on two telecommunications carriers to provide high-speed links connecting our global development centers. Internationally, we rely on multiple links on submarine cable paths provided by various service providers to connect our Indian global development centers with network hubs in other parts of the world. Our significant investment in redundant infrastructure enables us to provide uninterrupted service to our clients.

MODULAR GLOBAL SOURCING

The nature of technology outsourcing is changing. Historically, enterprises either outsourced their technology requirements entirely or on a standalone project-by-project basis. The complete outsourcing model is perceived to be deficient as a result of:
Similarly, project-by-project outsourcing is also perceived to have its deficiencies, resulting in increased operational risk and coordination costs, as well as the failure to fully leverage service providers’ complete range of capabilities.

We have developed our Modular Global Sourcing framework to address these issues and assist clients in evaluating and defining, on both a modular and an enterprise-wide basis, the client’s business processes and applications that can be outsourced, and the capabilities required to effectively deliver those processes and applications to the organization. We then assist the client in assessing whether a particular process, application or infrastructure is best retained within the organization or is suitable for outsourcing based on various factors including third-party capabilities, potential cost savings, risks to the organization and importance of the function. Thereafter, we assist in sourcing decisions, the related risk assessments, transitioning, and program management and execution.

Our systematic approach to evaluating an enterprise’s IT systems and business processes under the Modular Global Sourcing framework allows us to better align our solutions to our clients’ business, operations and IT platforms. As a result, our clients are able to benefit from our Global Delivery Model and potentially realize cost savings, enhanced efficiencies and competitive advantages, while retaining control and flexibility. Modular Global Sourcing also positions us to offer the broadest range of services to the greatest number of clients and to capture a greater share of our clients’ technology budgets.

ORGANIZATION RESTRUCTURING

We internally reorganized ourselves in 2011, which we believe will:
This internal reorganization consolidated our previous seven business units into four industry units. These new units are:
These units are global encompassing the Americas, Europe, APAC and MEA. They each contain complete client service and delivery capabilities for meeting client needs, allowing these units to respond to client needs with domain specific service capabilities.

India and FinacleTM business units continue to be organized as before.

To complement the new internal business unit structure, we have consolidated our offerings into three groups:
OUR SOLUTIONS

Consulting and Systems Integration Services

Infosys' Consulting and Systems Integration (C&SI) services group focuses on delivering best-in-class end-to-end business transformation engagements with a focus on delivering tangible and quantifiable business value. Our portfolio of services includes providing front-end business strategy consulting services, business requirements definition, business process re-engineering, business and technology solution design, package evaluation and implementation, complex program management, organizational design and change management, systems integration services and upgrades and maintenance. We have a best-in-class value realization method that enables delivery of real business value through tightly linking operational metrics with technology and process decisions.
 
Additionally, we work with our clients as they leverage commercially available enterprise software packages for large, complex business transformation programs. We help our clients implement and utilize these software packages developed by third-party vendors. Our solutions largely relate to product suites from SAP AG and Oracle Corporation and also extend to certain product suites from IBM Corporation, Microsoft Corporation, Pegasystems Inc., SalesForce.com Inc., Software AG and TIBCO Software Inc.
 
We also provide services to clients in areas such as customer relationship management, supply chain management, human capital management, corporate performance management, business analytics, business process management, enterprise application integration and system integration
 
Business IT Services

We work with clients worldwide to help them run more efficient IT operations. Our charter for the Business Optimization services is to partner with clients in their journey towards unlocking greater efficiency from their existing IT assets–systems, processes and infrastructure. With our Business Optimization services, we believe clients can achieve sustained operational superiority with the ability to significantly differentiate themselves in the marketplace.
 
At the heart of our work we deliver best-in-class services ranging across application development, application maintenance, third party testing, large scale IT infrastructure rationalization and business process outsourcing. These offerings are provided to clients across geographies and industry verticals including banking and capital markets, insurance, technology, communications, media, entertainment, energy, utilities, manufacturing, aerospace and defense, pharmaceuticals, healthcare, retail, consumer goods, logistics and public services. We complement our industry expertise with specialized support for our clients. We also leverage the expertise of our various Technology Centres of Excellence and Infosys Labs, our research arm, to create customized solutions for our clients. Finally, we ensure the integrity of our service delivery by utilizing a scalable and secure infrastructure.

We generally assume full project management responsibility in each of our solution offerings. We strictly adhere to our SEI-CMMI Level 5 internal quality and project management processes. Our project delivery focus is supplemented by our knowledge management system that enables us to leverage existing solutions across our company, where appropriate, and develop in-house tools for project management and software life-cycle support. We believe that these processes, methodologies, knowledge management systems and tools help deliver cost-effective solutions to clients, mitigate project-related risks, enhance the quality of our offerings and allow our clients to improve the time-to-market for their solutions.

Custom Software Application Development

We develop customized software solutions for our clients. We aim to provide high-quality solutions that are secure, easy-to-deploy and modular so as to facilitate enhancements and extensions. Our proprietary methodologies also allow our software applications to integrate stringent security measures throughout the software development lifecycle.

We create new applications or enhance the functionalities of our clients’ existing software applications. Our projects vary in size and duration. Each project typically involves all aspects of the software development process including defining requirements, designing, prototyping, programming and module integration, user acceptance testing, user training, installation and maintenance and support of these systems. In recent years, we have witnessed increased emphasis on the user experience aspect of application development owing to multiple devices used for accessing the software solutions and apps. Infosys User Experience (UX) Center of Excellence helps clients to deliver compelling experiences to their customers via their websites and apps.

We perform system design and software coding and run pilots primarily at our global development centers, while activities relating to the defining of requirements, transition planning, user training, user acceptance testing and deployment are performed at the client’s site. Our application development services span the entire range of mainframe, client server, Internet and mobile technologies. We leverage various methodologies to develop these software solutions.

Maintenance and Production Support Services

Our maintenance and production support services help clients improve the availability of their applications portfolio and reduce cost of maintenance. These services also provide clients with insights into their application portfolio and help them optimize the value of that portfolio and manage the risks associated with it. We take a proactive approach to software maintenance and production support, by focusing on long-term functionality, stability and preventive maintenance to avoid problems that typically arise from incomplete or short-term solutions. The practice focus on Application Services has been deepened and it works constantly with the Maintenance Center of Excellence (CoE) to pioneer next generation enhanced maintenance services that enable our clients to reduce lights-on operational spends and focus on strategic transformation. This approach is coupled with stringent quality control processes and global shared services centers. We have also invested in knowledge management and internal development of software processes and tools to increase automation of our delivery systems and thereby enhance productivity.

Our new Integrated Application Management Platform (IAM) has adopted a set of tools to aid in the acquisition, collating and use of organizational knowledge and incident diagnosis in production support. IAM’s knowledge management features enable our teams to address multiple issues that commonly arise in the maintenance and support of software and enable our clients to get the benefit of reduced IT support cost, higher-quality first level problem resolution and operational efficiency.

Independent Validation Solutions

We offer end-to-end validation solutions, specialized testing services, such as services oriented architecture (SOA) testing, data warehouse testing, package testing, test consulting and other testing services, to clients across various industry verticals. Also, in response to changing market and client demands, we have introduced new service offerings such as cloud testing, infrastructure testing, test environment management and security testing. Our quality assurance solutions are aimed at building high reliability and predictability in our client technology systems, keeping in mind the time to market and optimization constraints.

We have invested internally in developing technology based solutions for test life cycle automation, non-functional testing and vertical specific testing solutions. We have also built alliances with leading test tool vendors such as Hewlett-Packard Company (HP), International Business Machines Corp. (IBM), Microsoft Corporation, CA, Inc., Parasoft Corporation, Micro Focus International plc, Compuware Corporation and TestPlant Ltd. and are involved in building joint solutions with some of these alliance partners. These testing solutions facilitate high-reliability in our client applications and products while ensuring that they are delivered cost-effectively and with reduced time-to-market. Our dedicated testing professionals are trained at an in-house testing academy along various dimensions including industry domains, technology, quality processes, testing methodologies and project management.

Our engagements span multiple geographies across business lines of our clients. We provide a broad range of services, including independent testing, maintenance testing, package testing for implementations, upgrades and roll outs, functional automation, performance testing, test process maturity assessment, Test Center of Excellence (TCoE) design and implementation, quality assurance transformation, and user acceptance testing. We provide these offerings through a “Managed Testing Services” model with centers of specialization for test automation, performance testing, data warehouse testing, SOA testing, test data management, infrastructure testing and user acceptance testing. With our managed testing services model and our test consulting services, we have played a key role in transforming the client’s testing organization leading to continuous improvement in quality at reduced costs.

Infrastructure Management Services

We provide a consulting led approach for the ‘Transform and Run’ part of our clients’ IT infrastructure business. Our end-to-end service offerings include Enterprise Computing, Infrastructure Applications, End User Computing, and Network and Security services. These end-to-end solutions leverage our technical expertise and benchmarked operational processes to help our clients achieve technology-led business transformation with better alignment to business goals, enhanced agility in responding to changing business needs, more effective management of the costs and complexity of their ever-changing IT infrastructures. We assist our clients with new IT operations process paradigms, such as virtualization, cloud computing, grid computing, infrastructure-as-utility and “green” IT and help transform our clients’ IT environments to leverage these next generation technologies across their data centers, networks, production and end-user computing environments.

We have made significant investments in developing innovative solutions and offerings that can unlock substantial value for our clients leveraging partnerships with industry leaders. We launched Infosys Infrastructure Testing Services this year—a comprehensive, integrated offering that enables clients to validate their IT infrastructure as they deploy large-scale programs such as datacenter consolidation, virtualization and technology upgrades. We are working with a leading large banking client to provide enterprise infrastructure testing services as the client conducts a major IT infrastructure transformation program. With this offering, we have been able to significantly reduce the risk of downtime for the client.

Engineering Services
 
We provide engineering solutions to support our clients across the product lifecycle of our clients' offerings, from product ideation and creation to sustenance and end of life management. The practice features deep traditional engineering skills along with manufacturing and supply chain expertise that ranges from embedded firmware to composite material design. Overall, Infosys has 20 years of experience in engineering services serving clients in the Fortune Global 500 in twelve different industries. We utilize a global delivery model to design, build, execute and manage complex projects requiring integration of engineering services with IT and BPO.
 
Offerings include mechanical systems involving the design and rendering of aircraft subsystems such as fuselages, wings and landing gear, passenger cabin seating systems for both aerospace and automotive original equipment manufacturers (OEMs); electronic products and systems involving the design, development and full lifecycle management of platforms, firmware, applications and operating systems for devices and products serving multiple industry segments; software engineering involving services supporting the application lifecycle for all supported industry sectors including independent software vendors (ISVs) and OEMs like Microsoft Corporation, engineering solutions that include the implementation, systems integration and solution development of product lifecycle management (PLM), point-of-sale and manufacturing execution system (MES/shop floor) packages and consulting which involves IP-lead engagements in the areas of cost/should cost modeling and process reengineering.
All offerings are operated with a relentless pursuit of quality, productivity and innovation (e.g., research and development services, design and development of mechanical, electronic and embedded systems, product globalization, testing and validation). Innovation is done jointly with clients to take their offerings to market where we design, implement and maintain the platforms and solutions they need to run operations, ensure full connectivity to the rest of the enterprise and support their business processes
 
Business Process Management

We offer business process management services through Infosys BPO. Infosys BPO enables clients to outsource several process-intensive operations that relate to specific industry vertical processes and functional horizontal processes. Infosys BPO’s industry-specific service offerings include the following:
The function-specific service offerings of Infosys BPO include the following:
Products, Platforms and Solutions

Our products, platforms and solutions are geared to drive innovation-led growth for our clients. They cater to next generation market needs driven by global trends, including digital consumers, emerging economies, new commerce and healthcare. Our offerings leverage technologies in the areas of cloud computing, mobility, big data, rich media and social. By combining products from us and our partners, cloud-based hosting and platform operations, we help clients accelerate the business outcomes they seek.

All our Products, Platforms and Solutions are branded under the Infosys Edge™ umbrella

Our products are licensable systems that deliver functionalities that clients value. They can be used as standalone, customized or as building blocks in a larger enterprise application. They drive a business model that encompasses larger service engagements around the product license. We are investing in both industry-specific and cross-industry products.

For example, Infosys AssistEdge provides an integrated customer service experience across channels, transforming contact centers from issue resolution centers to revenue generating units. Infosys BigDataEdge empowers IT and business teams to quickly discover, analyze and act on information, both structured and unstructured, to drive business decisions. Our Transaction Reconciliation System manages diverse reconciliation needs of enterprises including cash flow reconciliations, stock reconciliations, account reconciliation and other reconciliations. Our Omni-Channel Personalization Engine helps retailers foster consumer relationship by presenting personalized content across channels.

Our suite of business platforms are built around specific themes that provide significant opportunities to enterprises. This suite drives deeper engagement with digital consumers, builds smarter organizations and addresses the needs of emerging markets. Our offerings are powered by best-in-class domain expertise, IP and cloud computing. Our focus is on delivering guaranteed business outcomes that impact either our client’s top-line or bottom-line. We host, operate and manage these business platforms on a subscription-based pricing model, providing our clients with rapid time-to-value.

For example, Infosys BrandEdge™, our digital marketing platform built using our proprietary Infosys BLUE™ framework addresses the comprehensive marketing needs of organizations. Infosys CommerceEdge™, our ecommerce and social commerce platform drives multi-channel commerce by enhancing consumer experience, driving traffic and increasing order value. Infosys ProcureEdge™, our end-to-end source-to-pay platform helps enterprises realize rapid and sustainable savings across their source-to-pay lifecycle. Infosys WalletEdge™, our mobile commerce and payments platform enables a financial ecosystem of consumers, merchants, telecoms, banks, government, & enterprises, to tap the potential of mobile commerce. Infosys TradeEdge™, our comprehensive trader partner platform enables global companies to accelerate long-term growth in emerging markets by driving better trade collaboration and bringing visibility and reach on secondary sales.

Our Edge suite of platforms has received industry recognition, winning the NASSCOM Business Innovation Award for 2013.

Our other industry platforms include (i) McCamish Systems’ proprietary VPAS and PMACS platforms which provide innovative solutions to the insurance and financial services industries; and (ii) solutions in strategic sourcing, category management and managed procurement services provided by Portland Group.

Each of our solutions address a specific business opportunity or a challenge, often domain-specific. Our solutions are early instances of a future product or platform and are typically co-created with clients. We are investing significantly in solutions in the areas of cloud, enterprise mobility and sustainability.

Cloud
 
Our vision is to deliver a trusted cloud ecosystem for our clients. Our proposition is to be a cloud ecosystem integrator for our clients where we assume responsibility for the entire lifecycle of our client’s cloud initiative, backed by our best-in-class partner ecosystem. This provides our clients with the convenience of a single point of accountability and transparency.
 
In order to realize this vision, we have created the Cloud Ecosystem Hub solution. Our Cloud Ecosystem Hub solution helps clients create, adopt and manage their hybrid cloud ecosystem. The solution:
The Institute of Directors, India recently conferred the prestigious Golden Peacock Award to Infosys Cloud Ecosystem Hub.

Enterprise Mobility

We provide comprehensive enterprise mobility services and solutions to our clients to help them use Mobility as a strategic business differentiator. We accelerate the deployment of mobility with our IP, pre-built micro-apps, tools & accelerators, and agile methodologies. We currently deliver a range of consulting services, business solutions, technology solutions and technology services to our clients. Solutions such as our mobile point of sale and guided sales provide ready-made solutions to mobile challenges in an industry. All our solutions are delivered in multi-device and multi-platform environments.

Infosys has also invested heavily in building technology capabilities as well as complementary alliances. We have technology centers of excellence (CoEs) in several leading mobile platforms for development of tools and accelerators. Our alliances and partnerships with strategic players in the enterprise mobility ecosystem help Infosys deliver a comprehensive mobility experience to our clients.

Sustainability

We currently provide the following set of competencies that help address enterprise sustainability challenges:
Banking Software Products

FinacleTM, our universal banking solution, provides banking clients with the ability to transform product, process and customer experience, by equipping them with the ‘accelerated innovation’ that is key to building tomorrow’s bank. FinacleTM is a comprehensive, flexible and fully Web-enabled solution that addresses the core, e-banking, mobile, CRM, wealth management, treasury, and Islamic banking requirements of universal, retail and corporate banks worldwide. Other offerings include the FinacleTM core banking solution for regional rural banks; FinacleTM digital commerce solution, which enables next generation digital payments; FinacleTM alerts solution, which alerts end-users on events recorded by diverse business systems; FinacleTM Advizor, which combines the convenience of human intervention with banking self-service channels through the interplay of video, audio and data communication; and FinacleTM WatchWiz, a comprehensive new-generation monitoring solution that allows banks to monitor, diagnose and resolve issues.

Our professional services complement the solutions portfolio and include consulting, package implementation, independent validation, migration, application development and maintenance, system integration, software performance engineering and support.

As of March 31, 2013, FinacleTM is the choice of 168 banks across 81 countries and powers operations across 49,600 branches and enables its customer banks to serve 447 million accounts and 359 million consumers worldwide.

OUR CLIENTS

We market our services to large enterprises throughout the globe. We have a strong market presence in North America, Europe and Asia Pacific. We are also currently building strong presences in South America and Africa.

Our revenues for the last three fiscal years by geographic area are as follows:
 
 
Fiscal
 
2013
2012
2011
North America
62.2%
63.9%
65.3%
Europe
23.1%
21.9%
21.5%
India
2.1%
2.2%
2.2%
Rest of the World
12.6%
12.0%
11.0%
Total
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%

We have in-depth expertise in many industries and sectors, including financial services, manufacturing, telecommunications, retail, utilities and logistics. Our revenues for the last three fiscal years by market segment were as follows:

 
Fiscal
 
2013
2012
2011
Financial services and insurance (FSI)
33.9%
35.1%
35.9%
Manufacturing enterprises (MFG)
22.0%
20.6%
19.6%
Energy, utilities, communication and services (ECS)
20.2%
21.4%
24.0%
Retail, consumer packaged goods, logistics and life sciences (RCL)
23.9%
22.9%
20.5%
Total
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%

For each of fiscal 2013, 2012 and 2011 our largest client contributed 3.8%, 4.3% and 4.7%, respectively, of our total revenues.

The volume of work we perform for specific clients varies from year to year based on the nature of the assignments we have with our clients. Thus, a major client in one year may not provide the same level of revenues in a subsequent year. However, in any given year, a limited number of clients tend to contribute a significant portion of our revenues.

SALES AND MARKETING

Our sales and marketing strategies are distinct and complementary.

Sales Strategy: Our sales strategy focuses on the following:
Marketing Strategy: Our marketing strategy complements our sales strategy by providing proof points to our success and articulating our unique brand differentiation. The core expression of this is embodied in our tagline, “Building Tomorrow’s Enterprise.” This tagline captures the essential foundation of the company’s efforts in transforming the business and accelerating innovation for our clients.

Building Tomorrow’s Enterprise is more than just a brand expression. It is also central to our relationship with our clients and informs our interaction with them. The focus on Building Tomorrow’s Enterprise permeates all aspects of our external-facing image to clients, prospects, media, and analysts.

Sales Execution Strategy: Our sales teams are trained to promote and sell our solutions by articulating the business value that we are able to deliver to our prospects and clients. To do so, we use a cross-functional, integrated sales approach in which our account managers, sales personnel, project managers and business consultants analyze potential projects and collaboratively develop strategies to sell our solutions to potential clients.

Also, all significant sales efforts have executive-level sponsorship to provide requisite oversight and institutionalize the relationship with the prospect or client organization.

This integrated sales approach allows for a smooth transition to execution once the sale is completed, and the institutionalized connection between the organizations strengthens the relationship and helps to address client concerns and changes in project requirements rapidly and effectively.

With existing clients, we constantly seek to expand the nature and scope of our engagements by extending the breadth and volume of services offered, with a focus on increasing our clients’ competitiveness through our proven and reliable Global Delivery Model. During fiscal 2013, 2012 and 2011, 97.8%, 97.8% and 98.0% of our revenue came as repeat business from existing clients, respectively. Our onsite project and account managers proactively identify client needs and work with our sales team to structure solutions to address those needs.

Further, client visits offshore also serve as an important mechanism to strengthen client loyalty and trust. Clients interact with their respective Infosys teams, share their own experiences and expectations with us, and in turn get a much better perspective about our strengths and capabilities.

Besides these one-on-one contacts between our clients and Infosys, we also promote client loyalty through a sales, marketing and alliances program that includes media and industry analyst events, sponsorship of, and participation in, targeted industry conferences, trade shows, recruiting efforts, community outreach and investor relations.

As a result of our growing worldwide brand and presence, prospective clients proactively reach out to us in many cases.

Sales and Marketing Organization. We market our services from 65 sales and marketing offices located in 29 countries. With our global sales operations spread across different parts of the world, we target our efforts towards the world’s largest companies. Our sales efforts are complemented by our marketing team, which assists in brand building and other corporate and field-level marketing efforts. As of March 31, 2013, we had approximately 1,300 sales and marketing employees.

COMPETITION

We operate in a highly competitive and rapidly changing market and compete with:
For larger projects, we typically compete with other technology services providers in response to requests for proposals. Clients often cite our Global Delivery Model, comprehensive end-to-end solutions, ability to scale, superior quality and process execution, industry expertise, experienced management team, talented professionals, track record and competitive pricing as reasons for awarding us contracts.

In the future we expect intensified competition from some of the firms above, and may also experience competition from new competitors. In particular, we expect increased competition from firms that strengthen their offshore presence in India or other low-cost locations and from firms in market segments that we have recently entered.

We understand that price alone cannot constitute a sustainable competitive advantage. We believe that the principal competitive factors in our business are:
We believe we compete favorably with respect to these factors.

HUMAN CAPITAL

Our professionals are our most important assets. We believe that the quality and level of service that our professionals deliver are among the highest in the global technology services industry. We are committed to remaining among the industry’s leading employers.

As of March 31, 2013, we employed approximately 156,000 employees, of which approximately 147,000 are technology professionals, including trainees. During fiscal 2013, we recorded approximately 6,700 new hires, net of attrition. Our culture and reputation as a leader in the technology services industry enables us to recruit and retain some of the best available talent in India. The key elements that define our culture include:
 
Recruitment
 
We have built our global talent pool by recruiting new students from premier universities, colleges and institutes in India and through need-based hiring of project leaders and middle managers. We typically recruit only students in India who have consistently shown high levels of achievement. We also selectively recruit students from campuses in the United States, the United Kingdom, Australia and China. We rely on a rigorous selection process involving a series of aptitude tests and interviews to identify the best applicants. This selection process is continually assessed and refined based on the performance tracking of past recruits.

Our reputation as a premier employer enables us to select from a large pool of qualified applicants. For example, during fiscal 2013, we received approximately 379,000 employment applications, interviewed 48,100 applicants and extended offers of employment to 27,300 applicants. In fiscal 2013, we added 1,300 new employees, net of attrition. These statistics do not include Infosys BPO and our wholly-owned subsidiaries, which together, recruited approximately 5,400 new hires, net of attrition, during fiscal 2013.
 
Training and Development

Competence development of our people continues to be a key area of strategic focus for us. We launched new programs to align with the needs of the Infosys 3.0 strategy. In keeping with the changes in the use of technology in education, we enhanced our technology lead training efforts in multiple areas.

Our flagship industry-academia partnership program, Campus Connect, also launched the technology enabled co-teach program to reach out to students in engineering institutions.

The Knowledge Management system at Infosys won the Indian MAKE (Most Admired Knowledge Enterprise) award winner for the 8th time. Our researchers continued to demonstrate their thought leadership in several areas through their publications at global conferences and through contributions to book chapters and publications.

Compensation

Our technology professionals receive competitive salaries and benefits. We have a performance-linked compensation program that links compensation to individual performance, as well as our company performance.

INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY

Our intellectual property rights are critical to our business. We rely on a combination of patent, copyright, trademark and design laws, trade secrets, confidentiality procedures and contractual provisions to protect our intellectual property. We currently have 84 issued patents granted by the United States Patent and Trademark Office and 3 patents issued by the Luxembourg Patent Office. An aggregate of 532 unique patent applications are pending under various stages of prosecution. We have 23 trademarks registered across classes identified for various goods and services in India and in other countries. We require employees, independent contractors and, whenever possible, vendors to enter into confidentiality agreements upon the commencement of their relationships with us. These agreements generally provide that any confidential or proprietary information developed by us or on our behalf be kept confidential. These agreements also provide that any confidential or proprietary information disclosed to third parties in the course of our business be kept confidential by such third parties. However, our clients usually own the intellectual property in the software we develop for them.

Our efforts to protect our intellectual property may not be adequate. Our competitors may independently develop similar technology or duplicate our products and/or services. Unauthorized parties may infringe upon or misappropriate our products, services or proprietary information. In addition, the laws of India do not protect intellectual property rights to the same extent as laws in the United States. In the future, litigation may be necessary to enforce our intellectual property rights or to determine the validity and scope of the proprietary rights of others. Any such litigation could be time-consuming and expensive.

We could be subject to intellectual property infringement claims as the number of our competitors grows and our product or service offerings overlap with competitive offerings. In addition, we may become subject to such claims since we may not always be able to verify the intellectual property rights of third parties from whom we license a variety of technologies. Defending against these claims, even if they are not meritorious, could be expensive and divert our attention from operating our company. If we become liable to third parties for infringing upon their intellectual property rights, we could be required to pay substantial damage awards and be forced to develop non-infringing technology, obtain licenses or cease selling the applications that contain the infringing technology. The loss of some of our existing licenses could delay the introduction of software enhancements, interactive tools and other new products and services until equivalent technology could be licensed or developed. We may be unable to develop non-infringing technology or obtain licenses on commercially reasonable terms, if at all.

We regard our trade name, trademarks, service marks and domain names as important to our success. We rely on the law to protect our proprietary rights to them, and we have taken steps to enhance our rights by filing trademark applications where appropriate. We have obtained registration of our key brand ‘INFOSYS’ as a trademark in both India and in the United States. We also aggressively protect these names and marks from infringement by others.

RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT

Our research and development efforts focus on developing and refining our methodologies, tools and techniques, improving estimation processes and adopting new technologies. We have several groups engaged in our research and development activities. These groups are listed below.
 
Infosys Labs

At Infosys Labs, we have identified large, multidisciplinary problem spaces that embody the challenges facing our clients and we are creating technology solutions to solve them.
To enable the co-creation of new solutions, we have set up innovation centers with a number of our clients, university partners, technology partners and industry research consortiums.
Infosys Labs focuses on developing significant new Intellectual Property to enable new and differentiated products, platforms, solutions and services by Infosys business groups.

During fiscal 2013, Infosys Labs, filed over 97 unique patent applications in the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), the Indian Patent Office and other jurisdictions. Our research and development expenses for fiscal 2013, 2012 and 2011 were $173 million, $140 million and $116 million respectively.

EFFECT OF GOVERNMENT REGULATION ON OUR BUSINESS

Regulation of our business by the Indian government affects our business in several ways. We benefit from certain tax incentives promulgated by the Government of India, including a ten-year tax holiday from Indian corporate income taxes for the operation of our Indian facilities located in STPs and tax holidays for operation of our Indian facilities located in SEZs. As a result of these incentives, our operations have been subject to relatively insignificant Indian tax liabilities. The tax holiday for all of our STP units expired as of March 31, 2011. We have also benefited from the liberalization and deregulation of the Indian economy by the successive Indian governments since 1991, including the current Indian government. Further, there are restrictive Indian laws and regulations that affect our business, including regulations that require us to obtain approval from the Reserve Bank of India and/or the Ministry of Finance of the Government of India to acquire companies organized outside India, and regulations that require us, subject to some exceptions, to obtain approval from relevant government authorities in India in order to raise capital outside India. The conversion of our equity shares into ADSs is governed by guidelines issued by the Reserve Bank of India.

In addition, the ability of our technology professionals to work in the United States, Europe and in other countries depends on the ability to obtain the necessary visas and work permits.

As of March 31, 2013, the majority of our technology professionals in the United States held either H-1B visas (approximately 10,800 persons), which allow the employee to remain in the United States for up to six years during the term of the work permit and work as long as he or she remains an employee of the sponsoring firm, or L-1 visas (approximately 1,600 persons), which allow the employee to stay in the United States only temporarily.
 
Although there is no limit to new L-1 visas, there is a limit to the aggregate number of new H-1B visas that the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, or CIS, may approve in any government fiscal year which is 65,000 annually, plus 20,000 H-1B visas which are only available to skilled workers who possess a Master's or higher degree from institutions of higher education in the United States. Further, in response to the terrorist attacks in the United States, the CIS has increased its level of scrutiny in granting new visas. This may, in the future, also lead to limits on the number of L-1 visas granted. In addition, the granting of L-1 visas precludes companies from obtaining such visas for employees with specialized knowledge: (1) if such employees will be stationed primarily at the worksite of another company in the U.S. and the employee will not be controlled and supervised by his or her employer, or (2) if such offsite placement is essentially an arrangement to provide labor for hire rather than in connection with the employee's specialized knowledge. Immigration laws in the United States may also require us to meet certain levels of compensation, and to comply with other legal requirements, including labor certifications, as a condition to obtaining or maintaining work visas for our technology professionals working in the United States.
 
Immigration laws in the United States and in other countries are subject to legislative change, as well as to variations in standards of application and enforcement due to political forces and economic conditions. In addition, the U.S. Congress is considering extensive changes to U.S. immigration laws regarding the admission of high-skilled temporary and permanent workers. Legislation in the U.S. Senate would, among other things, increase the annual H-1B numerical cap from 65,000 to at least 110,000 and would reduce the existing green card backlog for professional workers. However, all employers would be required to pay higher wages to H-1B workers and conduct additional U.S. worker recruitment. Furthermore, the proposed Senate legislation includes several provisions intended to limit the number of H-1B and L-1 workers in a company's U.S. workforce and the ability of a company to place H-1B and L-1B workers at third party worksites. For example, the Senate legislation would prohibit a company from having more than fifty percent of its U.S. workforce in H-1B or L-1 status and a company with more than thirty percent of its U.S. workforce in H-1B or L-1 status would be required to pay an additional $5000 fee per foreign temporary worker. A company with more than fifteen percent of its workforce in H-1B status would be prohibited from placing H-1B workers at third party worksites. If those provisions are signed into law, our cost of doing business in the United States would increase and that may discourage customers from seeking our services. This could have a material and adverse effect on our business, revenues and operating results.
 
Further, effective August 14, 2010, the CIS has announced a fee increase of $2,000 for certain H-1B visa petitions and $2,250 for certain L-1 visa petitions. It is difficult to predict the political and economic events that could affect immigration laws, or the restrictive impact they could have on obtaining or monitoring work visas for our technology professionals. Our reliance on work visas for a significant number of technology professionals makes us particularly vulnerable to such changes and variations as it affects our ability to staff projects with technology professionals who are not citizens of the country where the work is to be performed. As a result, we may not be able to obtain a sufficient number of visas for our technology professionals or may encounter delays or additional costs in obtaining or maintaining the conditions of such visas. Additionally, we may have to apply in advance for visas and this could result in additional expenses during certain quarters of the fiscal year.
 
In April 2011, a United States senator submitted a letter to U.S. Secretary of State and Secretary of Homeland Security, requesting that their respective departments review the B-1 business visa program and investigate the manner in which it is being utilized by companies, including Infosys. In the event that the U.S. government undertakes any actions which limit the B-1 business visa program or other visa program that we utilize, this could materially and adversely affect our business and results of operations.
 
Further, the United Kingdom government has recently introduced an interim limit on the number of visas that may be granted.
 
LEGAL PROCEEDINGS
On May 23, 2011, we received a subpoena from a grand jury in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas. The subpoena required that we provide to the grand jury certain documents and records related to our sponsorships for, and uses of, B1 business visas. We have complied with the subpoena. In connection with the subpoena, during a meeting with the United States Attorney's Office for the Eastern District of Texas, we were advised that we and certain of our employees are targets of the grand jury investigation. In addition, we were recently advised that this investigation was continuing and additional subpoenas may be issued. We are engaged in discussions with the U.S. Attorney's Office regarding this matter; however, we cannot predict the final outcome of the investigation or the discussions with the U.S. Attorney's Office.
 
In addition, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (“DHS”) has reviewed our employer eligibility verifications on Form I-9 with respect to our employees working in the United States. In connection with this review, we have been advised that the DHS has found errors in a significant percentage of our Forms I-9 that the DHS has reviewed, and may impose fines and penalties on us related to such alleged errors. At this time, we cannot predict the outcome of the discussions with DHS or other governmental authority regarding the review of our Forms I-9.

In the event that the U.S. government undertakes any actions which limit the B-1 business visa program or other visa program that we utilize, this could materially and adversely affect our business and results of operations. Further, in the event that any governmental authority imposes sanctions, fines or penalties on us or our employees, this could materially and adversely affect our business and results of operations.
 
In light of the fact that, among other things, the grand jury is continuing its investigation and we remain in discussions with the U.S. Attorney's Office regarding these matters, we are unable to make an estimate of the amount or range of loss that we expect to incur in connection with the resolution of these matters.

In addition, we are subject to legal proceedings and claims, which have arisen in the ordinary course of our business. Our management does not reasonably expect that these legal actions, when ultimately concluded and determined, will have a material and adverse effect on our results of operations or financial condition.
 
ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE

We hold a majority interest in the following company:

Infosys BPO. Infosys established Infosys BPO in April 2002, under the laws of India. As of March 31, 2013, Infosys holds 99.98% of the outstanding equity shares of Infosys BPO.

Infosys is the sole shareholder of the following companies:

Infosys Australia. In January 2004, we acquired, for cash, 100% of the equity in Expert Information Services Pty. Limited, Australia. The acquired company was renamed as 'Infosys Technologies (Australia) Pty. Limited'. As of March 31, 2013, Infosys Australia is under liquidation.

Infosys China. In October 2003, we established a wholly-owned subsidiary, Infosys China in Shanghai, China, to expand our business operations in China.

Infosys Mexico. In June 2007, we established a wholly-owned subsidiary, Infosys Mexico to expand our business operations in Latin America.

Infosys Sweden. In March 2009, we incorporated a wholly-owned subsidiary, Infosys Technologies (Sweden) AB to expand our operations in Europe.

Infosys Brasil. On August 7, 2009, we incorporated a wholly-owned subsidiary, Infosys Tecnologia do Brasil Ltda to expand our operations in South America.

Infosys Public Services. On October 9, 2009, we incorporated a wholly-owned subsidiary, Infosys Public Services, to focus and expand our operations in the U.S. public services market.

Infosys Shanghai. On February 21, 2011, we incorporated a wholly-owned subsidiary, Infosys Technologies (Shanghai) Company Limited.
 
Infosys Consulting Inc. In April 2004, we incorporated a wholly-owned subsidiary, Infosys Consulting Inc., in the State of Texas to add high-end consulting capabilities to our global delivery model. On October 7, 2011, the board of directors of Infosys Consulting Inc., approved the termination and winding down of the entity, and entered into an assignment and assumption agreement with Infosys Limited. The termination of Infosys Consulting Inc., became effective on January 12, 2012, in accordance with the Texas Business Organizations Code. Effective January 12, 2012, the assets and liabilities of Infosys Consulting Inc., were transferred to Infosys Limited.
 
Infosys Consulting India Limited. Infosys Consulting India is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Infosys Consulting Inc. Effective January 12, 2012, the assets and liabilities of Infosys Consulting, Inc., were transferred to Infosys Limited. Consequently, Infosys Consulting India Limited is now a wholly owned subsidiary of Infosys Limited. On February 9, 2012, Infosys Consulting India Limited filed a petition in the Honourable High Court of Karnataka for its merger with Infosys Limited.
 
Lodestone Holding AG On October 22, 2012, Infosys acquired 100% of the voting interests in Lodestone Holding AG, a global management consultancy firm headquartered in Zurich, Switzerland.
 
PROPERTY, PLANTS AND EQUIPMENT
 
Our principal campus, Infosys City is located at Electronics City, Bangalore, India. Infosys City consists of approximately 3.66 million square feet of land and 3.77 million square feet of operational facilities. The campus features, among other things, an Education and Research unit, a Management Development Center and extensive state-of-the-art conference facilities.
 
Additionally, we have leased independent facilities measuring approximately 519,000 square feet in Electronics City which accommodate approximately 5,800 employees.
 
Our capital expenditure on property, plant and equipment for fiscal 2013, 2012 and 2011 was $382 million, $301 million and $285 million, respectively. As of March 31, 2013 we had contractual commitments for capital expenditure of $312 million. All our capital expenditures are financed out of cash generated from operations.

Our software development facilities are equipped with a world-class technology infrastructure that includes networked workstations, servers, data communication links and video-conferencing.

We have 22 sales and marketing offices in the United States, four in Germany, three each in Australia, Canada, Switzerland and the UAE, two each in India, UK, Malaysia, the Netherlands, Czech Republic, Japan and France and one each in Belgium, Brazil, Denmark, Finland, Hong Kong, Ireland, Mauritius, Mexico, New Zealand, Norway, Russia, Singapore, Spain, South Africa, Italy, China and Sweden. We believe our facilities are adequately utilized. Appropriate expansion plans are being undertaken to meet our expected future growth.

Our most significant leased and owned properties are listed in the table below. We have only listed our leased and owned properties that are in excess of 100,000 square feet, and each such facility is located in India.
 
Location
Building
  Ownership
Land
 Ownership
 
Approx. Sq. ft.
  
Approx Sq. ft.
  
Software Development Facilities
        
Bangalore (Infosys City), Karnataka
–
  –
23,958
Leased
Bangalore (Infosys City), Karnataka
3,772,114
  Owned
3,660,404
Owned
Bangalore (Center Point, Electronics City), Karnataka
148,300
  Leased
–
–
Bangalore Sarjapur & Billapur, Karnataka
–
  –
12,674,920
Owned
Bangalore (Devanahalli), Karnataka
–
 –
374,313
Owned
Bangalore (Salarpuria Building, Electronics City) Karnataka
225,245
  Leased
–
–
Bangalore (Tower Office, Banerghatta Road), Karnataka
120,906
  Leased
–
–
Bangalore (JP IT Park Building, Electronics City), Karnataka
145,561
  Leased
–
–
Bangalore - Baghmane Tech Park, Karnataka
102,605
  Leased
–
–
Bhubaneswar (Chandaka Industrial Park), Orissa
879,721
  Owned
1,999,455
Leased
Bhubaneswar (Info Valley Goudakasipur & Arisol), Orissa
–
  –
2,218,040
Leased
Chandigarh (SEZ Campus)
1,135,580
  Owned
1,316,388
Leased
Chennai (Sholinganallur), Tamil Nadu
508,300
  Owned
578,043
Leased
Chennai (Maraimalai Nagar), Tamil Nadu
2,869,448
  Owned
5,617,084
Leased
Chennai - BPO Offices
133,416
  Leased
–
–
Hyderabad (Manikonda Village), Andhra Pradesh
1,873,209
  Owned
2,194,997
Owned
Hyderabad (Pocharam Village), Andhra Pradesh
1,627,268
  Owned
19,615,145
Owned
Mangalore (Kottara), Karnataka
204,000
  Owned
119,790
Owned
Mangalore (Pajeeru and Kairangala Village), Karnataka
1,010,969
  Owned
15,148,485
Leased
Mangalore (Kairangala Village), Karnataka
–
  –
258,747
Owned
Mysore (Hebbal Electronic City), Karnataka
9,349,259
  Owned
12,652,487
Owned
Mysore (Hebbal Electronic City), Karnataka
–
  –
2,047,346
Leased
Pune (Hinjewadi), Maharashtra
589,647
  Owned
1,089,004
Leased
Pune (Hinjewadi Phase II), Maharashtra
4,368,055
  Owned
4,965,005
Leased
Thiruvananthapuram, Attipura Village, (SEZ campus), Kerala
493,625
  Owned
2,178,009
Leased
Thiruvananthapuram, Pallipuram Village, (SEZ campus), Kerala
–
  –
2,171,039
Leased
Thiruvananthapuram (Technopark), Kerala
124,576
  Leased
–
–
Jaipur (BPO - SEZ Campus, M-City), Rajasthan
374,139
  Owned
–
–
Jaipur (Mahindra World City), Rajasthan
–
  –
6,452,568
Leased
Nagpur- Dahegaon Village (SEZ campus)
–
  –
6,193,211
Leased
Indore - Tikgarita Badshah & Badangarda Village (SEZ campus)
–
  –
5,666,307
Leased
Hubli - Gokul Village (SEZ campus)
    –
2,178,009
Leased
Shanghai Infosys Technologies (Shanghai) Co. Ltd  –  – 657,403
Leased
Shanghai, China 254,278  Leased –
–
Hangzhou, China 186,746  Leased –
–
Manila, Philippines 107,318  Leased –
–
Lodz, Poland 150,947  Leased –
–
Proposed Software Development Facilities
        
Chennai (Maraimalai Nagar), Tamil Nadu
2,554,633
  Owned  
–
Hyderabad (Pocharam Village), Andhra Pradesh
1,453,077
  Owned
–
–
Mangalore, Karnataka
1,388,800
  Owned
–
–
Mysore (Hebbal Electronic City), Karnataka
2,159,535
  Owned
–
–
Pune (Hinjewadi Phase II), Maharashtra
1,863,467
  Owned
–
–
Jaipur SEZ, Rajasthan
404,106
  Owned
–
–
Thiruvananthapuram (Technopark), Kerala
2,139,267
  Owned
–
–
Bhubhaneshwar (SEZ)
515,620
  Owned
–
–
Under Construction
    
 
  
M&C Building 1&2 Electronic city Bangalore
529,364
  Owned
–
–
Delhi (Unitech Building)
135,209
  Owned
–
–
*The nature of the ownership is that of a land use right.
 
Item 4 A. Unresolved Staff Comments

None.

Item 5. Operating and Financial Review and Prospects

The consolidated financial statements of the Company included in this Annual Report on Form 20-F have been prepared in accordance with International Financial Reporting Standards as issued by International Accounting Standards Board. The discussion, analysis and information presented in this section should be read in conjunction with our consolidated financial statements included herein and the notes thereto.

OPERATING RESULTS

This information is set forth under the caption entitled 'Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations' below and is incorporated herein by reference.

LIQUIDITY AND CAPITAL RESOURCES

This information is set forth under the caption entitled 'Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations' below and is incorporated herein by reference.

RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT, PATENTS AND LICENSES, ETC.

We have committed and expect to continue to commit in the future, a material portion of our resources to research and development. Efforts towards research and development are focused on refinement of methodologies, tools and techniques, implementation of metrics, improvement in estimation process and the adoption of new technologies.

Our research and development expenses for fiscal 2013, 2012 and 2011 were $173 million, $140 million and $116 million, respectively.

TREND INFORMATION

This information is set forth under the caption entitled “Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” below and is incorporated herein by reference.

MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS

Overview
 
We are a leading global technology services company that provides business consulting, technology, engineering and outsourcing services. In addition, we offer software products for clients in the banking industry.
 
Our professionals deliver high quality solutions by leveraging our Global Delivery Model through which we divide projects into components that we execute simultaneously at client sites and at our development centers in India and around the world. We seek to optimize our cost structure by maintaining the flexibility to execute project components where it is most cost effective. Our Global Delivery Model also allows us to provide clients with high quality solutions in reduced time-frames enabling them to achieve operational efficiencies. Our sales, marketing and business development teams are organized to focus on specific geographies and industries and this helps us to customize our service offerings to our client's needs. Our primary geographic markets are North America, Europe and the Asia Pacific region. We serve clients in financial services, manufacturing, telecommunications, retail, utilities, logistics and other industries.

There is an increasing need for highly skilled technology professionals in the markets in which we operate and in the industries to which we provide services. At the same time, companies are reluctant to expand their internal IT departments and increase costs. These factors have increased the reliance of companies on their outsourced technology service providers and are expected to continue to drive future growth for outsourced technology services. We believe that because the effective use of offshore technology services may offer lower total costs of ownership of IT infrastructure, lower labor costs, improved quality and innovation, faster delivery of technology solutions and more flexibility in scheduling, companies are increasingly turning to offshore technology service providers. India, in particular, has become a premier destination for offshore technology services. The key factors contributing to the growth of IT and IT enabled services in India include high quality delivery, significant cost benefits and the availability of skilled IT professionals. Our proven Global Delivery Model, our comprehensive end to end solutions, our commitment to superior quality and process execution, our long standing client relationships and our ability to scale make us one of the leading offshore technology service providers in India.
 
There are numerous risks and challenges affecting the business. These risks and challenges are discussed in detail in the section entitled 'Risk Factors' and elsewhere in this Annual Report on Form 20-F.
 
We were founded in 1981 and are headquartered in Bangalore, India. We completed our initial public offering of equity shares in India in 1993 and our initial public offering of ADSs in the United States in 1999. We completed three sponsored secondary ADS offerings in the United States in August 2003, June 2005 and November 2006. We did not receive any of the proceeds from any of our sponsored secondary offerings.
 
During fiscal 2011, we incorporated a wholly owned subsidiary, Infosys Technologies (Shanghai) Company Limited.
 
On October 7, 2011, the board of directors of Infosys Consulting Inc., approved the termination and winding down of the entity, and entered into an assignment and assumption agreement with Infosys Limited. The termination of Infosys Consulting, Inc. became effective on January 12, 2012, in accordance with the Texas Business Organizations Code. Effective January 12, 2012, the assets and liabilities of Infosys Consulting, Inc., were transferred to Infosys Limited.
 
On October 22, 2012, we acquired 100% of the voting interests in Lodestone Holding AG, a global management consultancy firm headquartered in Zurich, Switzerland. The business acquisition was conducted by entering into a share purchase agreement for a cash consideration of $219 million and an additional consideration of up to $112 million, which we refer to as deferred purchase price, payable to the selling shareholders of Lodestone Holding AG who are continuously employed or otherwise engaged by us or our subsidiaries during the three year period following the date of the acquisition.
 
At our Annual General Meeting held on June 9, 2012, our shareholders approved a final dividend of $0.58 per equity share (RUPEE SYMBOL32.00 per equity share), including a special dividend of $0.18 per equity share (RUPEE SYMBOL10.00 per equity share), which in the aggregate resulted in a cash outflow of $382 million, inclusive of corporate dividend tax of $53 million.
 
On October 12, 2012, our board of directors, approved payment of interim dividend of approximately $0.28 (RUPEE SYMBOL15.00) per equity share. The dividend payment resulted in a cash outflow of approximately $190 million, including a corporate dividend tax of $26 million, and was paid to holders of our equity shares and ADSs in October 2012.
 
Further, our Board of Directors, in its meeting on April 12, 2013, proposed a final dividend of approximately $0.50 per equity share (RUPEE SYMBOL27.00 per equity share). The proposal is subject to the approval of shareholders at the Annual General Meeting to be held on June 15, 2013, and if approved, would result in a cash outflow of approximately $334 million, inclusive of corporate dividend tax of $48 million.

During the year ended March 31, 2011 Infosys BPO (Thailand) Limited was liquidated.
 
On January 4, 2012, Infosys BPO acquired 100% of the voting interest in Portland Group Pty Ltd a strategic sourcing and category management services provider based in Australia. This business acquisition was conducted by entering into a share sale agreement for a cash consideration of $41 million.
 
The following table illustrates our growth in revenues, net profit, earnings per equity share and number of employees from fiscal 2009 to fiscal 2013:
 
 (Dollars in millions except share data)
 
2013
2009
Compounded annual growth rate
Revenues
$7,398
$4,663
12.2%
Net profit
$1,725
$1,281
7.7%
Earnings per equity share (Basic)
$3.02
$2.25
7.6%
Earnings per equity share (Diluted)
$3.02
$2.25
7.6%
Approximate number of employees at the end of the fiscal year
156,000
104,900
10.4%
 
Our revenue growth was attributable to a number of factors, including an increase in the size and number of projects executed for clients, as well as an expansion in the solutions that we provide to our clients. We added 235 new customers (gross) (including 36 clients from Infosys Lodestone) during fiscal 2013 as compared to 172 new customers during fiscal 2012 and 139 new customers during fiscal 2011. For fiscal 2013, 2012 and 2011, 97.8%, 97.8% and 98.0%, respectively, of our revenues came from repeat business, which we define as revenue from a client that also contributed to our revenue during the prior fiscal year.

Our business is designed to enable us to seamlessly deliver our onsite and offshore capabilities using a distributed project management methodology, which we refer to as our Global Delivery Model. We divide projects into components that we execute simultaneously at client sites and at our geographically dispersed development centers in India and around the world. Our Global Delivery Model allows us to provide clients with high quality solutions in reduced time-frames enabling them to achieve operational efficiencies.

Revenues

Our revenues are generated principally from technology services provided on either a time-and-materials or a fixed-price, fixed-timeframe basis. Revenues from services provided on a time-and-materials basis are recognized as the related services are performed. Revenues from services provided on a fixed-price, fixed-timeframe basis are recognized pursuant to the percentage-of-completion method. Most of our client contracts, including those that are on a fixed-price, fixed-timeframe basis can be terminated by clients with or without cause, without penalties and with short notice periods of between 0 and 90 days. Since we collect revenues on contracts as portions of the contracts are completed, terminated contracts are only subject to collection for portions of the contract completed through the time of termination. Most of our contracts do not contain specific termination-related penalty provisions. In order to manage and anticipate the risk of early or abrupt contract terminations, we monitor the progress on all contracts and change orders according to their characteristics and the circumstances in which they occur. This includes a focused review of our ability and our client's ability to perform on the contract, a review of extraordinary conditions that may lead to a contract termination and a review of the historical client performance considerations. Since we also bear the risk of cost overruns and inflation with respect to fixed-price, fixed-timeframe projects, our operating results could be adversely affected by inaccurate estimates of contract completion costs and dates, including wage inflation rates and currency exchange rates that may affect cost projections. Losses on contracts, if any, are provided for in full in the period when determined. Although we revise our project completion estimates from time to time, such revisions have not, to date, had a material adverse effect on our operating results or financial condition. We also generate revenue from software application products, including banking software. Such software products represented 4.0%, 4.6% and 4.9% of our total revenues for fiscal 2013, 2012 and 2011, respectively.

We experience from time to time, pricing pressure from our clients. For example, clients often expect that as we do more business with them, they will receive volume discounts. Additionally, clients may ask for fixed-price, fixed-timeframe arrangements or reduced rates. We attempt to use fixed-price arrangements for engagements where the specifications are complete, so individual rates are not negotiated.

Cost of Sales

Cost of sales represented 62.7%, 58.9% and 57.9% of total revenues for fiscal 2013, 2012 and 2011, respectively. Our cost of sales primarily consists of salary and other compensation expenses, depreciation, amortization of intangible assets, overseas travel expenses, cost of software purchased for internal use, third party items bought for service delivery to clients, cost of technical subcontractors, rent and data communication expenses. We depreciate our personal computers, mainframe computers and servers over two to five years and amortize intangible assets over their estimated useful life. Third party items bought for service delivery to clients are expensed. Amortization expense for fiscal 2013, 2012 and 2011 included under cost of sales was $7 million, $3 million and $2 million, respectively.

We typically assume full project management responsibility for each project that we undertake. Approximately 73.3%, 72.8% and 74.0% of the total billed person-months for our services during fiscal 2013, 2012 and 2011, respectively, were performed at our global development centers in India, and the balance of the work was performed at client sites and global development centers located outside India. The proportion of work performed at our facilities and at client sites varies from quarter-to-quarter. We charge higher rates and incur higher compensation and other expenses for work performed at client sites and global development centers located outside India. Services performed at a client site or at a global development center located outside India typically generate higher revenues per-capita at a lower gross margin than the same services performed at our facilities in India. As a result, our total revenues, cost of sales and gross profit in absolute terms and as a percentage of revenues fluctuate from quarter- to- quarter based in part on the proportion of work performed outside India. We intend to hire more local employees in many of the overseas markets in which we operate, which could decrease our gross profits due to increased wage and hiring costs. Additionally, any increase in work performed at client sites or global development centres located outside India may decrease our gross profits. We hire subcontractors on a limited basis from time to time for our own technology development needs, and we generally do not perform subcontracted work for other technology service providers. For fiscal 2013, 2012 and 2011, approximately 5.8%, 3.9% and 3.8% respectively, of our cost of sales was attributable to cost of technical subcontractors.
 
Revenues and gross profits are also affected by employee utilization rates. We define employee utilization as the proportion of total billed person months to total available person months, excluding administrative and support personnel. We manage utilization by monitoring project requirements and timetables. The number of software professionals that we assign to a project will vary according to the size, complexity, duration, and demands of the project. An unanticipated termination of a significant project could also cause us to experience lower utilization of technology professionals, resulting in a higher than expected number of unassigned technology professionals. In addition, we do not utilize our technology professionals when they are enrolled in training programs, particularly during our 20-29 week training course for new employees.

Selling and Marketing Expenses

Selling and marketing expenses represented 5.0%, 5.2% and 5.5% of total revenues for fiscal 2013, 2012 and 2011, respectively. Our selling and marketing expenses primarily consist of expenses relating to salaries and other compensation expenses of sales and marketing personnel, travel expenses, brand building, commission charges, rental for sales and marketing offices and telecommunications. We may increase our selling and marketing expenses as we seek to increase brand awareness among target clients and promote client loyalty and repeat business among existing clients.

Administrative Expenses

Administrative expenses represented 6.5%, 7.1% and 7.2% of total revenues for fiscal 2013, 2012 and 2011, respectively. Our administrative expenses primarily consist of expenses relating to salaries and other compensation expenses of senior management and other support personnel, travel expenses, legal and other professional fees, telecommunications, office maintenance, power and fuel charges, insurance, other miscellaneous administrative costs and provisions for doubtful accounts receivable. The factors which affect the fluctuations in our provisions for bad debts and write offs of uncollectible accounts include the financial health of our clients and of the economic environment in which they operate.

Other Income

Other income includes interest income, income from certificates of deposit, income from available-for-sale financial assets, marked to market gains / (losses) on foreign exchange forward and option contracts and foreign currency exchange gains / (losses) on translation of other assets and liabilities. For fiscal 2013, the interest income on deposits and certificates of deposit was $329 million and income from available-for-sale financial assets was $42 million. In fiscal 2013, we also recorded a foreign exchange gain of $33 million on translation of other assets and liabilities and a foreign exchange gain of $15 million on forward and options contracts. For fiscal 2012, the interest income on deposits and certificates of deposit was $374 million and income from available-for-sale financial assets / investments was $6 million. In fiscal 2012, we also recorded a foreign exchange gain of $70 million on translation of other assets and liabilities partially offset by a foreign exchange loss of $57 million on forward and options contracts. For fiscal 2011, the interest income on deposits and certificates of deposit was $250 million and income from available-for-sale financial assets was $5 million. In fiscal 2011, we also recorded a foreign exchange gain of $13 million on forward and options contracts, partially offset by a foreign exchange loss of $4 million on translation of other assets and liabilities.

Functional Currency and Foreign Exchange

The functional currency of Infosys, Infosys BPO and Infosys Consulting India is the Indian rupee. The functional currencies for Infosys Australia, Infosys China, Infosys Mexico, Infosys Sweden, Infosys Brasil, Infosys Public Services, Infosys Shanghai and Infosys Lodestone are the respective local currencies. The consolidated financial statements included in this Annual Report on Form 20-F are presented in U.S. dollars (rounded off to the nearest million) to facilitate global comparability. The translation of functional currencies of foreign operations to U.S. dollars is performed for assets and liabilities using the exchange rate in effect at the balance sheet date, and for revenue, expenses and cash flow items using a monthly average exchange rate for the respective periods. The gains or losses resulting from such translation are included in other comprehensive income and presented as currency translation reserves under other components of equity.

Generally, Indian law requires residents of India to repatriate any foreign currency earnings to India to control the exchange of foreign currency. More specifically, Section 8 of the Foreign Exchange Management Act, or FEMA, requires an Indian company to take all reasonable steps to realize and repatriate into India all foreign currency earned by the company outside India, within such time periods and in the manner specified by the Reserve Bank of India, or RBI. The RBI has promulgated guidelines that require the company to repatriate any realized foreign currency back to India, and either:
The RBI on May 10, 2012, mandated that in respect of all future foreign exchange earnings, 50% of the balances in the EEFC account should be converted into Indian rupee balances and credited to the Indian rupee accounts.
 
We typically collect our earnings and pay expenses denominated in foreign currencies using a dedicated foreign currency account located in the local country of operation. In order to do this, we are required to obtain, and have obtained, special approval from the RBI to maintain a foreign currency account in overseas countries like the United States. However, the RBI approval is subject to limitations, including a requirement that we repatriate all foreign currency in the account back to India within a reasonable time, except an amount equal to our local monthly operating cost for our overseas branch. We currently pay such expenses and repatriate the remainder of the foreign currency to India on a regular basis. We have the option to retain those earnings in an EEFC account (foreign currency denominated) or an Indian-rupee-denominated account. We convert substantially all of our foreign currency to Indian rupees to fund operations and expansion activities in India.

Our failure to comply with RBI regulations could result in RBI enforcement actions against us.

Income Taxes

Our net profit earned from providing software development and other services outside India is subject to tax in the country where we perform the work. Most of our taxes paid in countries other than India can be applied as a credit against our Indian tax liability to the extent that the same income is subject to tax in India.
 
We have benefited from certain tax incentives the Government of India had provided to the export of software from specially designated software technology parks, or STPs, in India and we continue to benefit from certain tax incentives for facilities set up under the Special Economic Zones Act, 2005. However, the tax incentives provided by the Government of India for STPs have expired, and all of our STP units are now taxable.
 
Under the Special Economic Zones Act, 2005 scheme, units in designated special economic zones which begin providing services on or after April 1, 2005 are eligible for a deduction of 100% of profits or gains derived from the export of services for the first five years from commencement of provision of services and 50% of such profits or gains for the five years thereafter. Certain tax benefits are also available for a further five years subject to the unit meeting defined conditions. When our tax holidays expire or terminate, our tax expense will materially increase, reducing our profitability.
 
As a result of these tax incentives, a portion of our pre-tax income has not been subject to significant tax in recent years. These tax incentives resulted in a decrease in our income tax expense of $202 million, $202 million and $173 million for fiscal 2013, 2012 and 2011, respectively, compared to the effective tax amounts that we estimate we would have been required to pay if these incentives had not been available. The per share effect of these tax incentives for fiscal 2013, 2012 and 2011 was $0.35, $0.35 and $0.30 respectively.
 
Our effective tax rate for fiscal 2013, 2012 and 2011 was 26.3%, 28.8% and 26.7%, respectively. The decrease in the effective tax rate to 26.3% for fiscal 2013 was mainly due to reduction in taxes on dividend received from subsidiary, deduction on eligible research and development expense based on the approval received from Department of Scientific and Industrial Research (DSIR) for FinacleTM and Infosys labs, reduction in branch profit tax expense and increase in exempt non-operating income. The weighted tax deduction on research and development expense is equal to 200% of such expenditures incurred during fiscal 2013. Our Indian statutory tax rate for the same period was 32.45%.
 
Pursuant to the enacted changes in the Indian Income Tax Laws effective April 1, 2007, a Minimum Alternate Tax (MAT) has been extended to income in respect of which a deduction may be claimed under section 10A of the Income Tax Act for STP units. Further, the Finance Act, 2011, which became effective April 1, 2011, extended MAT to SEZ operating and SEZ developer units also. Consequently, Infosys BPO has calculated its tax liability for current domestic taxes after considering MAT. The excess tax paid under MAT provisions being over and above regular tax liability can be carried forward and set off against future tax liabilities computed under regular tax provisions. Infosys BPO was required to pay MAT, and, accordingly, a deferred tax asset of $7 million and $11 million has been recognized on the balance sheet as of March 31, 2013 and March 31, 2012, respectively, which can be carried forward for a period of ten years from the year of recognition.
 
In addition, the Finance Act, 2011, which became effective April 1, 2011, extended MAT to SEZ operating and SEZ developer units also, which means that income in respect of which a deduction may be claimed under section 10AA or 80IAB of the Income Tax Act has to be included in book profits for computing MAT liability. With the growth of our business in SEZ units, we may be required to compute our tax liability under MAT in future years.
 
We, as an Indian resident, are required to pay taxes in India on the entire global income in accordance with Section 5 of the Indian Income Tax Act, 1961, which is reflected as domestic taxes. The geographical segment disclosures on revenue in note 2.19.2 of Item 18 of this Annual Report are based on the location of customers and do not reflect the geographies where the actual delivery or revenue-related efforts occur. The income on which domestic taxes are imposed are not restricted to the income generated from the “India” geographic segment. As such, amounts applicable to domestic income taxes and foreign income taxes will not necessarily correlate to the proportion of revenue generated from India and other geographical segments as per the geographic segment disclosure set forth in note 2.19.2 of Item 18 of this Annual Report.
 
Results of Operations

The following table sets forth certain financial information as a percentage of revenues:
 
 
Fiscal 2013
Fiscal 2012
Fiscal 2011
Revenues
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
Cost of sales
62.7%
58.9%
57.9%
Gross profit
37.3%
41.1%
42.1%
Operating expenses:
    
 
Selling and marketing expenses
5.0%
5.2%
5.5%
Administrative expenses
6.5%
7.1%
7.2%
Total operating expenses
11.5%
12.3%
12.7%
Operating profit
25.8%
28.8%
29.4%
Other income, net
5.8%
5.7%
4.4%
Profit before income taxes
31.6%
34.5%
33.8%
Income tax expense
8.3%
9.9%
9.0%
Net profit
23.3%
24.6%
24.8%

Results for Fiscal 2013 compared to Fiscal 2012
 
Revenues
 
The following table sets forth the growth in our revenues in fiscal 2013 from fiscal 2012:
(Dollars in millions)
 
Fiscal 2013
Fiscal 2012
Change
Percentage Change
Revenues
$7,398
$6,994
$404
5.8%
 
Revenues increased across most of the segments of our business. The increase in revenues was attributable primarily to an increase in business from existing clients, particularly in industries such as manufacturing (MFG) and retail, consumer packaged goods, logistics and life sciences (RCL) and also as a result of the addition of clients from the Infosys Lodestone acquisition.
 
Effective as of the quarter ended June 30, 2011, we reorganized our business to increase our client focus. Consequent to the internal reorganization there were changes effected in the reportable segments based on the “management approach” as defined in IFRS 8, Operating Segments (Refer Note 2.19, Segment reporting, of Item 18 of this Annual Report).
 
The following table sets forth our revenues by industry segments for fiscal 2013 and fiscal 2012:
 
Industry Segments
Percentage of Revenues
 
Fiscal 2013
Fiscal 2012
Financial services and insurance (FSI)
33.9%
35.1%
Manufacturing (MFG)
22.0%
20.6%
Energy, utilities, communication and services (ECS)
20.2%
21.4%
Retail, consumer packaged goods, logistics and life sciences  (RCL)
23.9%
22.9%
 
During fiscal 2013, the U.S. dollar appreciated against a majority of the currencies in which we transact business. The U.S. dollar appreciated by 5.6% and 3.8% against the United Kingdom Pound Sterling and Euro, respectively.
 
There were significant currency movements during fiscal 2013. Had the average exchange rate between each of these currencies and the U.S. dollar remained constant, during fiscal 2013 in comparison to fiscal 2012, our revenues in constant currency terms for fiscal 2013 would have been higher by $67 million at $7,465 million as against our reported revenues of $7,398 million, resulting in a growth of 6.7% as against a reported growth of 5.8%. The following table sets forth our revenues by industry segments for fiscal 2013, had the average exchange rate between each of the currencies namely, the United Kingdom Pound Sterling, Euro and Australian dollar, and the U.S. dollar remained constant, during fiscal 2013 in comparison to fiscal 2012, in constant currency terms:
 
Industry Segments
Fiscal 2013
Financial services and insurance (FSI)
33.8%
Manufacturing (MFG)
22.1%
Energy, utilities, communication and services (ECS)
20.2%
Retail, consumer packaged goods, logistics and life sciences  (RCL)
23.9%
 
The following table sets forth our industry segment profit (revenues less identifiable operating expenses and allocated expenses) as a percentage of industry segment revenue for fiscal 2013 and fiscal 2012 (refer note 2.19.1 under Item 18 of this Annual Report):
 
Industry Segments
Fiscal 2013
Fiscal 2012
Financial services and insurance (FSI)
30.1%
32.2%
Manufacturing (MFG)
25.9%
29.8%
Energy, utilities, communication and services (ECS)
27.8%
31.9%
Retail, consumer packaged goods, logistics and life sciences  (RCL)
29.6%
31.9%
 
Our revenues are also segmented into onsite and offshore revenues. Onsite revenues are for those services which are performed at client sites or at our global development centres outside India, as part of software projects, while offshore revenues are for services which are performed at our software development centers located in India. The table below sets forth the percentage of our revenues by location for fiscal 2013 and fiscal 2012:
 
 
Percentage of revenues
 
Fiscal 2013
Fiscal 2012
Onsite
51.0%
49.9%
Offshore
49.0%
50.1%
 
The services performed onsite typically generate higher revenues per-capita, but at lower gross margins in percentage as compared to the services performed at our own facilities in India. The table below sets forth details of billable hours expended for onsite and offshore for fiscal 2013 and fiscal 2012:
 
 
Fiscal 2013
Fiscal 2012
Onsite
24.8%
25.0%
Offshore
75.2%
75.0%
 
Revenues from services represented 96.0% of total revenues for fiscal 2013 as compared to 95.4% for fiscal 2012. Sales of our software products represented 4.0% of our total revenues for fiscal 2013 as compared to 4.6% for fiscal 2012.
 
The following table sets forth the revenues from fixed-price, fixed-timeframe contracts and time-and-materials contracts as a percentage of services revenues for fiscal 2013 and fiscal 2012:
 
 
Percentage of total services revenues
 
Fiscal 2013
Fiscal 2012
Fixed-price, fixed-timeframe contracts
40.0%
39.3%
Time-and-materials contracts
60.0%
60.7%
 
The following table sets forth our revenues by geographic segments for fiscal 2013 and fiscal 2012:
 
 
Percentage of revenues
Geographic Segments
Fiscal 2013
Fiscal 2012
North America
62.2%
63.9%
Europe
23.1%
21.9%
India
2.1%
2.2%
Rest of the World
12.6%
12.0%
 
A focus of our growth strategy is to expand our business to parts of the world outside North America, including Europe, Australia and other parts of Asia, as we expect that increases in the proportion of revenues generated from customers outside of North America would reduce our dependence upon our sales to North America and the impact on us of economic downturns in that region.
 
There were significant currency movements during fiscal 2013. The following table sets forth our revenues by geographic segments for fiscal 2013, had the average exchange rate between each of the currencies namely, the United Kingdom Pound Sterling, Euro and Australian dollar, and the U.S. dollar remained constant, during fiscal 2013 in comparison to fiscal 2012, in constant currency terms:
 
Geographic Segments
Fiscal 2013
North America
61.7%
Europe
23.6%
India
2.1%
Rest of the World
12.6%
 
The following table sets forth our geographic segment profit (revenues less identifiable operating expenses and allocated expenses) as a percentage of geographic segment revenue for fiscal 2013 and fiscal 2012 (refer note 2.19.2 under Item 18 of this Annual Report):
 
Geographic Segments
Fiscal 2013
Fiscal 2012
North America
28.7%
31.3%
Europe
28.0%
30.5%
India
18.2%
27.7%
Rest of the World
31.2%
35.8%
 
The decline in geographic segment profit as a percentage of geographic segment revenue in the Indian geographic segment during fiscal 2013 as compared to fiscal 2012 was primarily due to the operational costs incurred in connection with certain projects including costs related to software application products.
 
During fiscal 2013, the total billed person-months for our services other than business process management grew by 8.8% compared to fiscal 2012. The onsite and offshore billed person-months growth for our services other than business process management were 9.2% and 8.6% during fiscal 2013 compared to fiscal 2012. During fiscal 2013, there was a 4.8% decrease in offshore revenue productivity, and a 1.6% decrease in the onsite revenue productivity when compared to fiscal 2012. On a blended basis, the revenue productivity decreased by 3.0% during fiscal 2013 when compared to fiscal 2012.
 
Cost of sales
 
The following table sets forth our cost of sales for fiscal 2013 and fiscal 2012:
(Dollars in millions)
 
Fiscal 2013
Fiscal 2012
Change
Percentage Change
Cost of sales
$4,637
$4,118
$519
12.6%
As a percentage of revenues
62.7%
58.9%
 
 
 
(Dollars in millions)
 
Fiscal 2013
Fiscal 2012
Change
Employee benefit costs
$3,697
$3,377
$320
Deferred purchase price pertaining to acquisition (Refer note 2.3 under Item 18 of this Annual Report)
10
–
10
Depreciation and amortization
207
195
12
Travelling costs
217
164
53
Cost of technical sub-contractors
268
160
108
Cost of Software packages for own use
115
101
14
Third party items bought for service delivery to clients
27
34
(7)
Operating lease payments
28
26
2
Communication costs
23
19
 4
Repairs and maintenance
15
13
2
Consumables
5
–
5
Provision for post-sales client support
15
13
2
Other expenses
10
16
(6)
Total
$4,637
$4,118
$519
 
The increase in cost of sales as a percentage of revenues during fiscal 2013 from fiscal 2012 was attributable primarily to an increase in our employee benefit costs, cost of technical sub-contractors, travelling and communication costs, partially offset by a reduction in third party items bought for service delivery to clients. The increase in employee benefit costs during fiscal 2013 from fiscal 2012 was due to increase in billed person-months for our services other than business process management which grew by 8.8%, partially offset by curtailment gain recorded during fiscal 2013 on account of the company aligning the gratuity entitlement of certain employees prospectively to the Payment of Gratuity Act. The increase in cost of technical sub-contractors was due to increased engagement of technical sub-contractors to meet certain skill requirement in large projects. The increase in travelling and communication costs during fiscal 2013 from fiscal 2012 was due to an overall increase in the volume of our business.
 
Gross profit
 
The following table sets forth our gross profit for fiscal 2013 and fiscal 2012:
(Dollars in millions)
 
Fiscal 2013
Fiscal 2012
Change
Percentage Change
Gross profit
$2,761
$2,876
$(115)
(4.0)%
As a percentage of revenues
37.3%
41.1%
 
 
 
The decrease in gross profit during fiscal 2013 from fiscal 2012 was attributable to a 3.8% increase in cost of sales as a percentage of revenue.
 
Revenues and gross profits are also affected by employee utilization rates. The following table sets forth the utilization rates of billable employees for services and software application products, excluding business process outsourcing services:
 
 
Fiscal
 
2013
2012
Including trainees
68.9%
69.0%
Excluding trainees
72.5%
75.9%
 
Selling and marketing expenses
 
The following table sets forth our selling and marketing expenses for fiscal 2013 and fiscal 2012:
(Dollars in millions)
 
Fiscal 2013
Fiscal 2012
Change
Percentage Change
Selling and marketing expenses
$373
$366
$7
1.9%
As a percentage of revenues
5.0%
5.2%
 
 
 
(Dollars in millions)
 
Fiscal 2013
Fiscal 2012
Change
Employee benefit costs
$294
$283
$11
Travelling costs
33
37
(4)
Branding and marketing
25
25
–
Operating lease payments
6
5
1
Commission
6
6
–
Consultancy and professional charges
4
5
(1)
Communication costs
4
4
–
Other expenses
1
1
–
Total
$373
$366
$7
 
The increase in selling and marketing expenses during fiscal 2013 from fiscal 2012 was primarily attributable to an increase in employee benefit costs as a result of increase in the number of sales and marketing personnel.
 
Administrative expenses
 
The following table sets forth our administrative expenses for fiscal 2013 and fiscal 2012:
(Dollars in millions)
 
Fiscal 2013
Fiscal 2012
Change
Percentage Change
Administrative expenses
$479
$497
$(18)
(3.6)%
As a percentage of revenues
6.5%
7.1%
 
 
 
(Dollars in millions)
 
Fiscal 2013
Fiscal 2012
Change
Employee benefit costs
$148
$155
$(7)
Consultancy and professional charges
89
94
(5)
Repairs and maintenance
73
76
(3)
Power and fuel
39
38
1
Communication costs
39
34
5
Travelling costs
28
32
(4)
Rates and taxes
15
13
2
Operating lease payments
11
9
2
Insurance charges
8
8
–
Postage and courier
3
3
–
Printing and stationery
2
3
(1)
Provisions for doubtful accounts receivable
7
14
(7)
Consumables
1
–
1
Donations
2
–
2
Other expenses
14
18
(4)
Total
$479
$497
$(18)
 
The decrease in administrative expenses for fiscal 2013 compared to fiscal 2012 was primarily due to a decrease in employee benefit costs, consultancy and professional charges and provisions for doubtful accounts receivable, partially offset by increase in communication costs. The decrease in provision for doubtful account receivable was based on the management’s estimation on the collectability of the receivables.
 
Operating profit
 
The following table sets forth our operating profit for fiscal 2013 and fiscal 2012:
(Dollars in millions)
 
Fiscal 2013
Fiscal 2012
Change
Percentage Change
Operating profit
$1,909
$2,013
$(104)
(5.2)%
As a percentage of revenues
25.8%
28.8%
 
 
 
The decrease in operating profit as a percentage of revenues for fiscal 2013 from fiscal 2012 was attributable to a 3.8% decrease in gross profit as a percentage of revenue, partially offset by a 0.2% decrease in selling and marketing expenses and 0.6% decrease in administrative expenses.
 
Other income
 
The following table sets forth our other income for fiscal 2013 and fiscal 2012:
(Dollars in millions)
 
Fiscal 2013
Fiscal 2012
Change
Percentage Change
Other income, net
$433
$397
$36
9.1%
 
Other income for fiscal 2013 includes interest income on deposits and certificates of deposit of $329 million, foreign exchange gain of $33 million on translation of other assets and liabilities, income from available-for-sale financial assets of $42 million and a foreign exchange gain of $15 million on forward and options contracts. Other income for fiscal 2012 includes interest income on deposits and certificates of deposit of $374 million, foreign exchange gain of $70 million on translation of other assets and liabilities, and income from available-for-sale financial assets of $6 million partially offset by a foreign exchange loss of $57 million on forward and options contracts.
 
We generate substantially all of our revenues in foreign currencies, particularly the U.S. dollar, the United Kingdom Pound Sterling, Euro and the Australian dollar, whereas we incur a majority of our expenses in Indian rupees. The exchange rate between the Indian rupee and the U.S. dollar has changed substantially in recent years and may fluctuate substantially in the future. Consequently, the results of our operations are adversely affected as the Indian rupee appreciates against the U.S. dollar. Foreign exchange gains and losses arise from the appreciation and depreciation of the Indian rupee against other currencies in which we transact business and from foreign exchange forward and option contracts.
 
The following table sets forth the currency in which our revenues for fiscal 2013 and fiscal 2012 were denominated:
 
 Currency
Percentage of Revenues
 
Fiscal 2013
Fiscal 2012
U.S. dollar
70.6%
71.7%
United Kingdom Pound Sterling
6.4%
6.8%
Euro
8.8%
7.7%
Australian dollar
8.3%
7.6%
Others
5.9%
6.2%
 
The following table sets forth information on the foreign exchange rates in rupees per U.S. dollar, United Kingdom Pound Sterling, Euro and Australian dollar for fiscal 2013 and fiscal 2012:
 
 
Fiscal 2013 (rupee symbol)
Fiscal 2012 (rupee symbol)
Appreciation / (Depreciation) in percentage
Average exchange rate during the period:
 
 
 
U.S. dollar
54.54
48.10
(13.4)%
United Kingdom Pound Sterling
86.14
76.79
(12.2)%
Euro
70.34
66.28
(6.1)%
Australian dollar
56.24
50.33
(11.7)%
 
 
Fiscal 2013 (rupee symbol)
Fiscal 2012 (rupee symbol)
Exchange rate at the beginning of the period:
 
 
U.S. dollar
50.88
 44.60
United Kingdom Pound Sterling
81.46
 71.80
Euro
67.87
 63.38
Australian dollar
52.91
 46.11
Exchange rate at the end of the period:
  
 
U.S. dollar
54.29
50.88
United Kingdom Pound Sterling
82.23
81.46
Euro
69.50
67.87
Australian dollar
56.63
52.91
Appreciation / (Depreciation) of the Indian rupee against the relevant currency during the period (as a percentage):
  
 
U.S. dollar
(6.7)%
(14.1)%
United Kingdom Pound Sterling
(0.9)%
(13.5)%
Euro
(2.4)%
(7.1)%
Australian dollar
(7.0)%
(14.7)%
 
The following table sets forth information on the foreign exchange rates in U.S. dollar per United Kingdom Pound Sterling, Euro and Australian dollar for fiscal 2013 and fiscal 2012:
 
 
Fiscal 2013 ($)
Fiscal 2012 ($)
Appreciation / (Depreciation) in percentage
Average exchange rate during the period:
 
 
 
United Kingdom Pound Sterling
1.58
1.60
1.3%
Euro
1.29
1.38
6.5%
Australian dollar
1.03
1.05
1.9%
 
 
Fiscal 2013 ($)
Fiscal 2012 ($)
Exchange rate at the beginning of the period:
 
 
United Kingdom Pound Sterling
1.60
1.61
Euro
1.33
1.42
Australian dollar
1.04
1.03
Exchange rate at the end of the period:
    
United Kingdom Pound Sterling
1.51
1.60
Euro
1.28
1.33
Australian dollar
1.04
1.04
Appreciation / (Depreciation) of U.S. dollar against the relevant currency during the period:
    
United Kingdom Pound Sterling
5.6%
0.6%
Euro
3.8%
6.3%
Australian dollar
–
(1.0)%
 
For fiscal 2013, every percentage point depreciation/appreciation in the exchange rate between the Indian rupee and the U.S. dollar has affected our operating margins by approximately 0.4%. The exchange rate between the Indian rupee and the U.S. dollar has fluctuated substantially in recent years and may continue to do so in the future. We are unable to predict the impact that future fluctuations may have on our operating margins.
 
We have recorded a gain of $15 million and a loss of $57 million for fiscal 2013 and fiscal 2012, respectively, on account of foreign exchange forward and option contracts, which are included in total foreign currency exchange gains/ losses. Our accounting policy requires us to mark to market and recognize the effect in profit immediately of any derivative that is either not designated as a hedge, or is so designated but is ineffective as per IAS 39.
 
Income tax expense
 
The following table sets forth our income tax expense and effective tax rate for fiscal 2013 and fiscal 2012:
(Dollars in millions)
 
Fiscal 2013
Fiscal 2012
Change
Percentage Change
Income tax expense
$617
$694
$(77)
(11.1)%
Effective tax rate
26.3%
28.8%
 
 
 
The decrease in the effective tax rate to 26.3% for fiscal 2013 was mainly due to reduction in taxes on dividend received from subsidiary, deduction on eligible research and development expense based on the approval received from Department of Scientific and Industrial Research (DSIR) for FinacleTM and Infosys Labs, reduction in branch profit tax expense and increase in exempt non-operating income. The weighted tax deduction on research and development expense is equal to 200% of such expenditures incurred during fiscal 2013.  (Refer to note 2.16 of Item 18 of this Annual Report  for a reconciliation of the income tax provision to the amount computed by applying the statutory income tax rate to the income before income taxes).
  
Net profit
 
The following table sets forth our net profit for fiscal 2013 and fiscal 2012:
(Dollars in millions)
 
Fiscal 2013
Fiscal 2012
Change
Percentage Change
Net profit
$1,725
$1,716
$9
0.5%
As a percentage of revenues
23.3%
24.5%
 
 
 
The decrease in net profit as a percentage of revenues for fiscal 2013 from fiscal 2012 was attributable to a 3.0% decrease in operating profit as a percentage of revenue partially offset by a decrease of 2.5% in our effective tax rate and an increase of 9.1% in other income.
 
Results for Fiscal 2012 compared to Fiscal 2011
 
Effective as of the quarter ended June 30, 2011, we internally reorganized our business to increase our client focus. Consequent to this internal reorganization there were changes effected in the reportable segments based on the “management approach” as defined in IFRS 8, Operating Segments (Refer Note 2.19, Segment reporting, of Item 18 of this Annual Report). 
 
Revenues
 
The following table sets forth the growth in our revenues in fiscal 2012 from fiscal 2011:
(Dollars in millions)
 
Fiscal 2012
Fiscal 2011
Change
Percentage Change
Revenues
$6,994
$6,041
$953
15.8%
 
Revenues increased across most of the segments of our business. The increase in revenues was attributable primarily to an increase in business from existing clients, particularly in industries such as financial services and insurance (FSI), manufacturing (MFG) and retail, consumer packaged goods, logistics and life sciences (RCL).
 
The following table sets forth our revenues by industry segments for fiscal 2012 and fiscal 2011:
 
Industry Segments
Percentage of Revenues
 
Fiscal 2012
Fiscal 2011
Financial services and insurance (FSI)
35.1%
35.9%
Manufacturing (MFG)
20.6%
19.6%
Energy, utilities, communication and services (ECS)
21.4%
24.0%
Retail, consumer packaged goods, logistics and life sciences (RCL)
22.9%
20.5%
 
During fiscal 2012, the U.S. dollar depreciated against a majority of the currencies in which we transact business. The U.S. dollar depreciated by 3.2%, 4.5% and 11.7% against the United Kingdom Pound Sterling, Euro and Australian dollar, respectively.
 
There were significant currency movements during fiscal 2012. Had the average exchange rate between each of these currencies and the U.S. dollar remained constant, during fiscal 2012 in comparison to fiscal 2011, our revenues in constant currency terms for fiscal 2012 would have been lower by $103 million at $6,891 million as against our reported revenues of $6,994 million, resulting in a growth of 14.1% as against a reported growth of 15.8%. The following table sets forth our revenues by industry segments for fiscal 2012, had the average exchange rate between each of the currencies namely, the United Kingdom Pound Sterling, Euro and Australian dollar, and the U.S. dollar remained constant, during fiscal 2012 in comparison to fiscal 2011, in constant currency terms:
 
Industry Segments
Fiscal 2012
Financial services and insurance (FSI)
35.1%
Manufacturing (MFG)
20.6%
Energy, utilities ,communication and services (ECS)
23.1%
Retail, consumer packaged goods, logistics and life sciences (RCL)
21.2%
 
The following table sets forth our industry segment profit (revenues less identifiable operating expenses and allocated expenses) as a percentage of industry segment revenue for fiscal 2012 and fiscal 2011 (refer note 2.19.1 under Item 18 of this Annual Report):
 
Industry Segments
Fiscal 2012
Fiscal 2011
Financial services and insurance (FSI)
32.2%
33.3%
Manufacturing (MFG)
29.8%
31.6%
Energy, utilities, communication and services (ECS)
31.9%
32.3%
Retail, consumer packaged goods, logistics and life sciences (RCL)
31.9%
32.5%
 
Our revenues are also segmented into onsite and offshore revenues. Onsite revenues are for those services which are performed at client sites or at our global development centres outside India, as part of software projects, while offshore revenues are for services which are performed at our software development centers located in India. The table below sets forth the percentage of our revenues by location for fiscal 2012 and fiscal 2011:
 
 
Percentage of revenues
 
Fiscal 2012
Fiscal 2011
Onsite
49.9%
49.2%
Offshore
50.1%
50.8%
 
The services performed onsite typically generate higher revenues per-capita, but at lower gross margins in percentage as compared to the services performed at our own facilities. The table below sets forth details of billable hours expended as a percentage of revenue for onsite and offshore for fiscal 2012 and fiscal 2011:
 
 
Fiscal 2012
Fiscal 2011
Onsite
25.0%
24.2%
Offshore
75.0%
75.8%
 
Revenues from services represented 95.4% of total revenues for fiscal 2012 as compared to 95.1% for fiscal 2011. Sales of our software products represented 4.6% of our total revenues for fiscal 2012 as compared to 4.9% for fiscal 2011.
 
The following table sets forth the revenues from fixed-price, fixed-timeframe contracts and time-and-materials contracts as a percentage of services revenues for fiscal 2012 and fiscal 2011:
 
 
Percentage of total services revenues
 
Fiscal 2012
Fiscal 2011
Fixed-price, fixed-time frame contracts
39.3%
40.3%
Time-and-materials contracts
60.7%
59.7%
 
The following table sets forth our revenues by geographic segments for fiscal 2012 and fiscal 2011:
 
 
Percentage of revenues
Geographic Segments
Fiscal 2012
Fiscal 2011
North America
63.9%
65.3%
Europe
21.9%
21.5%
India
2.2%
2.2%
Rest of the World
12.0%
11.0%
 
A focus of our growth strategy is to expand our business to parts of the world outside North America, including Europe, Australia and other parts of Asia, as we expect that increases in the proportion of revenues generated from customers outside of North America would reduce our dependence upon our sales to North America and the impact on us of economic downturns in that region.
 
There were significant currency movements during fiscal 2012. The following table sets forth our revenues by geographic segments for fiscal 2012, had the average exchange rate between each of the currencies namely, the United Kingdom Pound Sterling, Euro and Australian dollar, and the U.S. dollar remained constant, during fiscal 2012 in comparison to fiscal 2011, in constant currency terms:
 
Geographic Segments
Fiscal 2012
North America
64.8%
Europe
21.7%
India
2.2%
Rest of the World
11.3%
 
The following table sets forth our geographic segment profit (revenues less identifiable operating expenses and allocated expenses) as a percentage of geographic segment revenue for fiscal 2012 and fiscal 2011 (refer note 2.19.2 under Item 18 of this Annual Report):
 
Geographic Segments
Fiscal 2012
Fiscal 2011
North America
31.3%
31.9%
Europe
30.5%
33.4%
India
27.7%
29.5%
Rest of the World
35.8%
35.5%
 
The decline in geographic segment profit as a percentage of geographic segment revenue in the Indian geographic segment during fiscal 2012 as compared to fiscal 2011 was primarily due to the initial operational costs incurred in connection with certain projects.
 
During fiscal 2012, the total billed person-months for our services other than business process management grew by 11.1% compared to fiscal 2011. The onsite and offshore billed person-months growth for our services other than business process management were 14.8% and 9.5% during fiscal 2012 compared to fiscal 2011. During fiscal 2012, there was a 5.1% increase in offshore revenue productivity, and a 2.2% increase in the onsite revenue productivity when compared to fiscal 2011. On a blended basis, the revenue productivity increased by 4.7% during fiscal 2012 when compared to fiscal 2011.
 
Cost of sales
 
The following table sets forth our cost of sales for fiscal 2012 and fiscal 2011:
(Dollars in millions)
 
Fiscal 2012
Fiscal 2011
Change
Percentage Change
Cost of sales
$4,118
$3,497
$621
17.8%
As a percentage of revenues
58.9%
57.9%
 
 
 
(Dollars in millions)
 
Fiscal 2012
Fiscal 2011
Change
Employee benefit costs
$3,377
$2,850
$527
Depreciation and amortization
195
189
6
Travelling costs
164
152
12
Cost of technical sub-contractors
160
132
28
Software packages for own use
101
77
24
Third party items bought for service delivery to clients
34
30
4
Operating lease payments
26
20
6
Communication costs
19
18
1
Repairs and maintenance
13
12
1
Provision for post-sales client support
13
1
12
Other expenses
16
16
–
Total
$4,118
$3,497
$621
 
The increase in cost of sales as a percentage of revenues during fiscal 2012 from fiscal 2011 was attributable primarily to an increase in our employee benefit costs, cost of technical sub-contractors, software packages for own use and provision for post-sales client support. The increase in employee benefit costs during fiscal 2012 from fiscal 2011 was due to an increase in employees, excluding sales and support personnel, from 123,811 as of fiscal 2011 to 141,788 as of fiscal 2012. Further, the offshore and onsite wages of our employees increased on an average by 10% to 12% and 2% to 3%, respectively, with effect from April 2011. The increase in cost of technical sub-contractors was due to increased engagement of technical sub- contractors to meet certain skill requirement in large projects. The increase in software packages for own use, is due to an increase in volume of system integration projects executed in the Indian market and also general increase in software bought for internal use. The increase in provision for post-sales client support during fiscal 2012 from fiscal 2011 was due to increase in provision made for contracts especially in certain financial services clients.
 
Gross profit
 
The following table sets forth our gross profit for fiscal 2012 and fiscal 2011:
(Dollars in millions)
 
Fiscal 2012
Fiscal 2011
Change
Percentage Change
Gross profit
$2,876
$2,544
$332
13.1%
As a percentage of revenues
41.1%
42.1%
 
 
 
The increase in gross profit during fiscal 2012 from fiscal 2011 was attributable to a 15.8% increase in revenue, partially offset by a 1.0% increase in cost of sales as a percentage of revenue.
 
Revenues and gross profits are also affected by employee utilization rates. The following table sets forth the utilization rates of billable employees for services and software application products, excluding business process outsourcing services:
 
 
Fiscal 2012
Fiscal 2011
Including trainees
69.0%
72.1%
Excluding trainees
75.9%
79.6%
 
Selling and marketing expenses
 
The following table sets forth our selling and marketing expenses for fiscal 2012 and fiscal 2011:
(Dollars in millions)
 
Fiscal 2012
Fiscal 2011
Change
Percentage Change
Selling and marketing expenses
$366
$332
$34
10.2%
As a percentage of revenues
5.2%
5.5%
 
 
 
(Dollars in millions)
 
Fiscal 2012
Fiscal 2011
Change
Employee benefit costs
$283
$268
$15
Travelling costs
37
28
9
Branding and marketing
25
21
4
Operating lease payments
5
4
1
Commission
6
3
3
Consultancy and professional charges
5
3
2
Other expenses
5
5
–
Total
$366
$332
$34
 
The number of our sales and marketing personnel increased to 1,132 as of March 31, 2012 from 1,001 as of March 31, 2011. The increase in selling and marketing expenses during fiscal 2012 from fiscal 2011 was primarily attributable to an increase in employee benefit costs as a result of increased head count and the result of the salary increase in April 2011.
 
Administrative expenses
 
The following table sets forth our administrative expenses for fiscal 2012 and fiscal 2011:
(Dollars in millions)
 
Fiscal 2012
Fiscal 2011
Change
Percentage Change
Administrative expenses
$497
$433
$64
14.8%
As a percentage of revenues
7.1%
7.2%
 
 
 
(Dollars in millions)
 
Fiscal 2012
Fiscal 2011
Change
Employee benefit costs
$155
$147
$8
Consultancy and professional charges
94
72
22
Repairs and maintenance
76
67
9
Power and fuel
38
37
1
Communication costs
34
30
4
Travelling costs
32
30
2
Rates and taxes
13
12
1
Operating lease payments
9
9
–
Insurance charges
8
7
1
Postage and courier
3
3
–
Printing and stationery
3
3
–
Provisions for doubtful accounts receivable
14
–
14
Other expenses
18
16
2
Total
$497
$433
$64
 
The increase in administrative expenses for fiscal 2012 compared to fiscal 2011 was primarily due to an increase in employee benefit costs and an increase in consultancy, professional charges and provisions for doubtful accounts receivable. The increase in consultancy and professional charges is primarily due to an increase in hiring charges of employees as well as increased legal charges. The increase in employee cost during fiscal 2012 from fiscal 2011 is primarily due to an increase in head count from 6,008 as at March 31, 2011 to 7,074 as at March 31, 2012, as well as increased salaries in April 2011. The increase in provision for doubtful account receivable was based on the management’s estimation on the collectability of the receivables.
 
Operating profit
 
The following table sets forth our operating profit for fiscal 2012 and fiscal 2011:
(Dollars in millions)
 
Fiscal 2012
Fiscal 2011
Change
Percentage Change
Operating profit
$2,013
$1,779
$234
13.2%
As a percentage of revenues
28.8%
29.4%
 
 
 
The decrease in operating profit as a percentage of revenues for fiscal 2012 from fiscal 2011 was attributable to a 1.0% decrease in gross profit as a percentage of revenue, partially offset by a 0.3% decrease in selling and marketing expenses and 0.1% decrease in administrative expenses.
 
Other income
 
The following table sets forth our other income for fiscal 2012 and fiscal 2011:
(Dollars in millions)
 
Fiscal 2012
Fiscal 2011
Change
Percentage Change
Other income, net
$397
$267
$130
48.7%
 
Other income for fiscal 2012 includes interest income on deposits and certificates of deposit of $374 million, foreign exchange gain of $70 million on translation of other assets and liabilities, and income from available-for-sale financial assets of $6 million partially offset by a foreign exchange loss of $57 million on forward and options contracts. Other income for fiscal 2011 includes interest income on deposits and certificates of deposit of $250 million, foreign exchange gain of $13 million on forward and options contracts and income from available-for-sale financial assets of $5 million, partially offset by a foreign exchange loss of $4 million on translation of other assets and liabilities.
 
We generate substantially all of our revenues in foreign currencies, particularly the U.S. dollar, the United Kingdom Pound Sterling, Euro and the Australian dollar, whereas we incur a majority of our expenses in Indian rupees. The exchange rate between the Indian rupee and the U.S. dollar has changed substantially in recent years and may fluctuate substantially in the future. Consequently, the results of our operations are adversely affected as the Indian rupee appreciates against the U.S. dollar. Foreign exchange gains and losses arise from the appreciation and depreciation of the Indian rupee against other currencies in which we transact business and from foreign exchange forward and option contracts.
 
The following table sets forth the currency in which our revenues for fiscal 2012 and fiscal 2011 were denominated:
 
 Currency
Percentage of Revenues
 
Fiscal 2012
Fiscal 2011
U.S. dollar
71.7%
72.8%
United Kingdom Pound Sterling
6.8%
7.2%
Euro
7.7%
6.9%
Australian dollar
7.6%
6.5%
Others
6.2%
6.6%
 
The following table sets forth information on the foreign exchange rates in Rupees per U.S. dollar, United Kingdom Pound Sterling, Euro and Australian dollar for fiscal 2012 and fiscal 2011:
 
 
  Fiscal 2012 (rupee symbol)
Fiscal 2011 (rupee symbol)
Appreciation / (Depreciation) in percentage
Average exchange rate during the period: