Dismissing the appeal of the revenue the Court held that the assessee was involved in the execution of more than one act, i. e., rendering service in the entire year, and therefore, it adopted the proportionate completion method. The revenue from service transactions usually recognised as the service was performed either by proportionate completion method or completed service contract method. The Revenue had not proved that due to the change in method the profits had been distorted. Besides that, the Revenue had accepted the change in the method of accounting in subsequent assessment years, viz., 2010-11, 2011-12 and 2012-13. Therefore there was no justification on the part of the Assessing Officer to change the method adopted by the assessee. Court also held that the activities of the assessee did not fall under the business of insurance.  (AY. 2009-10)