This problem has nothing to do with the net income provided by the VIE. Given the other posters, it looks like the VIE paid > book value for the receivables. Since you didn’t sell the assets if you reverse the transaction, you need to remove the “gain” provided to the sponsor.
You won’t always have a “gain” when you sell receivables to a VIE, only if the VIE and the sponser agree that the receivables are worth more than book value. But, if you are being told to remove the effects of the sale, then you have to remove the effect of the gain.
I would think that in a very basic scenario, the VIE would issue debt for 200 and pay the sponsor 200 for something they had on their books for 170. The extra 30 is income to the sponsor. Cash goes up by 200, Receivables down by 170, and Net Income up by 30. OR, the VIE could issue debt for 190 and the sponsor would have 10mm in an equity investment. Follow the cash transactions, and try not to make it too complicated.
If you reverse it, Cash goes down by 200, receivable up by 170, equity down by 30