Skip to main content

Corporate Social Responsibility Under Companies Act,2013

 It is true that the focus of every business is to earn an adequate profit because earning an adequate profit will help them to survive and grow. But we cannot ignore the aspect that the business uses the resources of society and from the help of society, it grows. Thus, it is necessary to give back to the society that will serve society. There was no such concept of corporate social responsibility in the Companies Act,1956 but this concept of corporate social responsibility was introduced in the Companies Act,2013.

What is corporate social responsibility?

According to this concept, the sole purpose of a company should not be only focused on earning profit but also to focus towards contributing to society. A company is dependent on society and it is the duty of the company to give back to society. Every company making a considerable amount of profit is bound to serve society. Such a company has to utilize their profit in such a way so that society develops and grow towards prosperity. 

Section 135 of the Companies Act lays down the provision regarding corporate social responsibility. 

On which company CSR shall be applicable?

A company including its subsidiary company and its holding company having a net worth of Rs 500 crores or more, having a turnover of Rs 1000 crores or more, and having a net profit of Rs 5 crores or more. Such companies are required to spend at least 2% of their net profit earned for the last three financial years towards corporate social responsibility. If the company fails to spend 2% of the profit, then the company should transfer such unspent money to an unspent CSR account at any scheduled bank. If the company fails to transfer the amount, then it will be penalized under Section 135(7) of the Indian Companies Act,2013.

The companies who will fail to comply with the above provisions are required to constitute a CSR committee consisting of three or more directors and if such a company is mandatory to appoint one independent director, then one of such directors shall be an independent director.

Activities that are not allowed under CSR activities-

  1. All the activities that are carried out in the normal course of business.

  2. No contributions shall be made to any political party under Section 182 of the Indian Companies Act,2013.

  3. No sponsorship activities allowed from CSR fund.

  4. Any statutory obligations that are carried outside of India.

What all functions are to be performed by the CSR committee-

  1. Primary function of the CSR Committee is to monitor the CSR policy of the company from time to time and to maintain a check and balance on such activities.

  2. To recommend the amount of money for expenditure for CSR purposes.

  3. To recommend all the CSR activities to the board which should be within the purview of Schedule VII of the Companies Act,2013.

What is the role of the Board of Directors-?

  1. The BOD must ensure the proper implementation of the policy.

  2. The BOD must disclose all the activities to the public.

  3. Maintaining a check and balance on the CSR reports.
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Section 58B of The Advocates Act - Special provision relating to certain disciplinary proceedings

 Section 58B The Advocates Act Description (1) As from the 1st day of September, 1963, every proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate of a High Court shall, save as provided in the first proviso to sub-section (2), be disposed of by the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if the existing advocate had been enrolled as an advocate on its roll. (2) If immediately before the said date, there is any proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate pending before any High Court under the Indian Bar Councils Act, 1926 (38 of 1926), such proceeding shall stand transferred to the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if it were a proceeding pending before the corresponding Bar Council under clause (c) of sub-section (1) of section 56: Provided that where in respect of any such proceeding the High Court has received the finding of a Tribunal constituted under section 11 of the Indian B
Post a Comment
Read more

Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of ClaimantCase Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant. TOLLEY Vs, J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement. Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be asked to resign from his respective club. Furthermore, there was evidence that the possible adverse effects of the caricature on the claimant’s reputation were brought to the defendants’ attention. The trial judge found that the caricature could have a defamatory meaning. The jury then found in favor of the claimant. Held The House of Lords held that in the circumstances of this case – as explained by the facts – the caricature was capable of constituting defamation. In other words, the publication could have the meaning alleged by the claimant. The Lords also ordered a new trial limited to the assessment of damages. NEWSTEAD V LANDON EXPRESS NEWSPAPER LTD, (1939) Facts: A newspaper published a defamatory article about Harold Newstead. However, another person with this name brought an action in libel. He claimed that the article had been misunderstood as leading to him. The defendant newspaper recognised that they published the article. Also, they denied that they had the intention of being defamatory of him. Consequently, the claimant argued that the newspaper was under a duty. The duty was to give a clear and complete description of the correct person. Moreover, the claimant argued that the defendants were in breach of the duty. Issues: The issue in Newstead v London Express Newspaper, was if the reasonable persons would have understood the words complained of to refer to the plaintiff. Held: The Court of Appeal stated that in accordance with the current law on libel, liability for libel does not depend on the intention of the defamer; but on the fact of the defamation. Accordingly, a reasonable man, in this case a newspaper publisher, must be aware of the possibility of individuals with the same name and must assume that the words published will be read by a reasonable man with reasonable care.

  Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant.  TOLLEY  Vs,  J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement.   Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be aske
1 comment
Read more

Rules as to delivery of goods

                             Rules as to delivery of goods Section 2(2) of Sale of Goods Act defines ‘delivery’ as a ‘voluntary transfer of possession from one person to another.’ Thus, if the transfer of goods is not voluntary and is taken by theft, by fraud, or by force, then there is no ‘delivery. Moreover, the ‘delivery’ should have the effect of putting the goods in possession of the buyer. The essence of the delivery is a voluntary transfer of possession of goods from one person to another. There is no delivery of goods where they are obtained at pistol point or theft. 1. Mode of Delivery: According to Section 33, delivery of goods sold may be made by doing anything which the parties agree shall be treated as delivery or which has the effect of putting the goods in the possession of the buyer or of any person authorized to hold them on his behalf. Delivery of goods may be actual, symbolic or constructive. 2. Expenses of Delivery: According to Section 36(5), unless otherwise agree
Post a Comment
Read more