Concessions to Corporate Sector
Concessions to Corporate
Sector
The Ministry of Corporate Affairs has notified
Companies (Corporate Social Responsibility Policy) Rules,
2014 (http://www.mca.gov.in), which prescribes the format for disclosure of utilisation of Corporate
Social Responsibility (CSR) funds by the companies.
There
are no specific tax exemption/concessions to companies under the Income Tax
Act, 1961 for expenditure incurred by companies towards CSR. However, spending
by companies on several activities like rural development projects, skill
development projects, agricultural extension projects, contribution to Prime
Minister’s National Relief Fund etc., which find place in Schedule VII of the
Companies Act, 2013, may qualify for tax exemptions under relevant provisions
of Income Tax Act, 1961 subject to the fulfilment of any specified conditions.
This
Ministry administers the Companies Act, which does not deal with employment
policy of corporates.
The rate
of growth of corporates in various States during each of the last three
financial years, State/UT-wise is given in Annex.
This
Ministry neither deals with priority sector nor with the investment policy of
the companies.
This was stated by Shri Arun Jaitley, Minister of
Corporate Affairs in written reply to a question in the Lok Sabha.
|
ANNEX
|
|
|
||||
|
Rate of growth of corporate in terms of number of companies in the
registry in various States/UT during each of the last three FYs
(State/UT-wise Distribution)
( Year on year growth in terms of percentage) |
|
|
||||
|
Sr. No.
|
State/UT
|
2012-13
|
2013-14
|
2014-15
|
|
|
|
1
|
Andaman and Nicobar Islands
|
8.90
|
14.73
|
11.46
|
|
|
|
2
|
Andhra Pradesh
|
7.08
|
7.38
|
9.17
|
|
|
|
3
|
Arunachal Pradesh
|
4.94
|
5.67
|
1.40
|
|
|
|
4
|
Assam
|
5.19
|
3.71
|
2.11
|
|
|
|
5
|
Bihar
|
9.99
|
13.08
|
8.21
|
|
|
|
6
|
Chandigarh
|
6.06
|
5.23
|
3.24
|
|
|
|
7
|
Chhattisgarh
|
7.41
|
7.53
|
4.35
|
|
|
|
8
|
Dadar & Nagar Haveli
|
4.19
|
5.80
|
3.15
|
|
|
|
9
|
Daman and Diu
|
2.91
|
7.41
|
2.30
|
|
|
|
10
|
Delhi
|
6.59
|
6.45
|
4.08
|
|
|
|
11
|
Goa
|
3.99
|
3.51
|
2.15
|
|
|
|
12
|
Gujarat
|
6.12
|
6.56
|
3.87
|
|
|
|
13
|
Haryana
|
15.04
|
14.78
|
9.80
|
|
|
|
14
|
Himachal Pradesh
|
6.43
|
6.66
|
4.47
|
|
|
|
15
|
Jammu and Kashmir
|
8.81
|
8.85
|
4.63
|
|
|
|
16
|
Jharkhand
|
10.57
|
12.53
|
7.46
|
|
|
|
17
|
Karnataka
|
7.34
|
8.14
|
6.39
|
|
|
|
18
|
Kerala
|
8.12
|
7.99
|
4.32
|
|
|
|
19
|
Lakshadweep
|
0.00
|
0.00
|
0.00
|
|
|
|
20
|
Madhya Pradesh
|
8.54
|
7.87
|
4.49
|
|
|
|
21
|
Maharashtra
|
5.96
|
6.16
|
3.71
|
|
|
|
22
|
Manipur
|
8.12
|
11.54
|
9.93
|
|
|
|
23
|
Meghalaya
|
4.22
|
2.77
|
1.91
|
|
|
|
24
|
Mizoram
|
5.62
|
2.20
|
5.21
|
|
|
|
25
|
Nagaland
|
6.03
|
4.13
|
2.02
|
|
|
|
26
|
Odisha
|
9.33
|
7.25
|
4.53
|
|
|
|
27
|
Puducherry
|
3.25
|
3.39
|
2.55
|
|
|
|
28
|
Punjab
|
4.81
|
4.97
|
2.86
|
|
|
|
29
|
Rajasthan
|
8.59
|
8.01
|
3.67
|
|
|
|
30
|
Sikkim
|
0.00
|
0.00
|
0.00
|
|
|
|
31
|
Tamil Nadu
|
5.98
|
5.85
|
4.23
|
|
|
|
32
|
Telangana
|
7.93
|
7.88
|
5.21
|
|
|
|
33
|
Tripura
|
13.41
|
12.66
|
5.39
|
|
|
|
34
|
Uttar Pradesh
|
11.97
|
13.20
|
9.15
|
|
|
|
35
|
Uttarakhand
|
10.33
|
11.20
|
7.15
|
|
|
|
36
|
West Bengal
|
7.23
|
5.48
|
2.24
|
|
|
|
Note: Number of companies as on end March of the year has been taken for
computation
of year on year growth.
|
||||||
Appointment of Independent
Director in the Company Including Public Sector Undertakings (PSUs)
Section 149(4) provides that every listed company shall have atleast 1/3rd of
total number of directors as independent directors. Clause 49(II)
of Listing Agreement further requires that in case the listed company does not
have a regular non-executive Chairman, at least half of the Board should
comprise Independent Directors. Further, where the regular
non-executive Chairman is a promoter of the company or is related to any
promoter or person occupying management positions at the Board level or at one
level below the Board, at least one-half of the Board of the company shall
consist of indpendendent directors.
Rule 4 of Companies (Appointment and Qualification of Directors) Rules,
2014 prescribe that unlisted public companies having a paid up capital of Rs.
10 crores OR more, OR turnover of Rs. 100 crores or more, OR having outstanding
loans, debentures and deposits exceeding Rs. 50 crores, should have atleast two
independent directors. However, if the audit committee constitution
requires a higher number, then such higher number of independent directors
shall be appointed. These provisions are applicable to Public
Sector Undertakings (PSUs) also.
Section 149 (6) read with Rule 5 of Companies (Appointment and
Qualification of Directors) Rules, 2014 prescribes the qualifications etc. for
an Independent Director. In addition, Department of Public Enterprises has
prescribed criteria for selection/appointment of non-official Directors on the
Board of CPSEs as per Annexure-I.
The number of companies, category wise, which have not appointed woman
directors are as follows:-
(i) listed companies including listed PSUs:- 1707
(ii) unlisted companies including unlisted PSUs:- 329
SEBI had prescribed fines on listed companies (other than PSUs) between Rs.
50,000 and Rs. 1,42,000 depending upon period of default from 1st April,
2015 to 1st October, 2015. Additionally, a per day
fine of Rs. 5,000 is being imposed for continued violation after 1st October,
2015. SEBI had requested Government to advise the concerned
administrative Ministries to take appropriate steps for ensuring compliance by
defaulting listed PSUs. Prosecution has been launched against 121
defaulting unlisted companies(other than PSUs).
This was stated by Shri Arun Jaitley, Minister of
Corporate Affairs in written reply to a question in the Lok Sabha.
Annexure-I
Criteria for selection/appointment of non-official
Directors on the Boards of CPSEs as laid down by the Government.
(A) Criteria
of Experience
(i) Retired Government
officials with a minimum of 10 years experience at Joint Secretary level or
above.
(ii) Persons who have retired
as CMD/CEOs of CPSEs and Functional
Directors of the Schedule 'A CPSEs. The ex-Chief Executives and ex-Functional Directors of the CPSEs will not be considered for appointment as non-official Director on the Board of the CPSE from which they retire. Serving Chief Executives/Directors of CPSEs will not be eligible to be considered for appointment as non-official Directors on the Boards of any CPSEs.
Directors of the Schedule 'A CPSEs. The ex-Chief Executives and ex-Functional Directors of the CPSEs will not be considered for appointment as non-official Director on the Board of the CPSE from which they retire. Serving Chief Executives/Directors of CPSEs will not be eligible to be considered for appointment as non-official Directors on the Boards of any CPSEs.
(iii) Academicians/Directors
of Institutes/Heads of Department and Professors having more than 10 years
teaching or research experience in the relevant domain e.g. management,
finance, marketing, technology, human
resources, or law.
(iv) Professionals of repute
having more than 15 years of relevant domain
experience in fields relevant to the company's area of operation.
experience in fields relevant to the company's area of operation.
(v) Former CEOs of private
companies if the company is (a) listed on the
Stock Exchanges or (b) unlisted but profit making and having an annual turnover of at least Rs.250 crore.
Stock Exchanges or (b) unlisted but profit making and having an annual turnover of at least Rs.250 crore.
(vi) Persons of eminence with
proven track record from Industry, Business or Agriculture or Management.
(vii) Serving CEOs and
Directors of private companies listed on the Stock Exchanges may also be
considered for appointment as part-time nonofficial Directors on the Boards of
CPSEs in exceptional circumstances.
(B) Criteria
of Educational Qualification
Minimum graduate degree from a recognized
university.
(C) Criteria
of Age
The age band should be between 45-65 years
(minimum/maximum limit). This could,
however, be relaxed for eminent professionals, for reasons to be recorded,
being limited to 70 years.
(D) Reappointment
The non-official Directors, will not be re-appointed in the same CPSE after
completing a maximum of two tenures, each tenure being for a period of three years.
(E) Appointment in number of
CPSEs at the same time
One person will not be appointed as non-official
Director on the Boards of more than three CPSEs at
the same time.
(F) Directorship in
private
companies
A person being considered for appointment as
non-official Director on the Board of CPSEs should not hold directorship in
more than 10 private companies.
*******
Registered Companies with ROC
Companies registered with Registrar of Companies
(ROCs), State/UT-wise as on 26.11.2015 is at Annexure – I. Number of closed
companies, State/UT-wise during the last three years and current financial year
is at Annexure - II.
Section 560 of the Companies Act, 1956
(corresponding provision in Companies Act, 2013 is Section 248, which is not
yet notified) provides for striking off the names of those companies which have
not been carrying on business or not in operation, if the Registrar of
Companies has a reason to believe so, after following prescribed
procedure. The Ministry had from time to time come out with Easy
Exit Schemes to enable such companies which are not carrying on business or in
operation, to apply for and get their names removed from the register.
The Ministry had also introduced a Fast Track Exit Scheme for defunct companies
to approach the Registrar of Companies from time to time for striking off their
names. As the scheme is still continuing, no separate/new proposal is under
consideration of the Ministry. The number of companies which
have been struck off from the register of companies during the years 2012-13,
2013-14, 2014-15 and 2015-16 (till 04.11.2015) are given in Annexure-III.
The Government has already brought out several
changes in the registration process such as (i) the requirement for obtaining
Director Identification Number by all Directors, (ii) verification
of the address of registered office by obtaining supporting documents,
and (iii) certification by a Company Secretary, Chartered
Accountant, Cost Accountant or Advocate who, are required to personally visit
the registered office and verify its existence. Detailed rules have been
prescribed in Companies (Incorporation) Rules, 2014 in this regard.
Further, it is stated that while Companies Act, 2013 (Chapter XXI, Part-I)
provides for registration of unregistered bodies, it does not mandate for all
unregistered bodies/companies to be registered under the said Act.
This was stated by Shri Arun Jaitley, Minister of Corporate Affairs in
written reply to a question in the Lok Sabha.
Annexure –I
Number of Companies
registered, State/UT-wise, as on 26.11.2015
|
Sl. No.
|
State/UT
|
Number of Companies
|
|
1.
|
Andaman and Nicobar Islands
|
278
|
|
2.
|
Andhra Pradesh
|
22566
|
|
3.
|
Arunachal Pradesh
|
507
|
|
4.
|
Assam
|
9568
|
|
5.
|
Bihar
|
21129
|
|
6.
|
Chandigarh
|
13091
|
|
7.
|
Chhattisgarh
|
7780
|
|
8.
|
Daman and Diu
|
309
|
|
9.
|
Delhi
|
282539
|
|
10.
|
Dadar Nagar Haveli
|
455
|
|
11.
|
Goa
|
7495
|
|
12.
|
Gujarat
|
83804
|
|
13.
|
Himachal Pradesh
|
4916
|
|
14.
|
Haryana
|
28522
|
|
15.
|
Jharkhand
|
9476
|
|
16.
|
Jammu and Kashmir
|
4246
|
|
17.
|
Karnataka
|
83454
|
|
18.
|
Kerala
|
39500
|
|
19.
|
Lakshadweep
|
12
|
|
20.
|
Maharashtra
|
307838
|
|
21.
|
Meghalaya
|
1001
|
|
22.
|
Manipur
|
462
|
|
23.
|
Madhya Pradesh
|
30828
|
|
24.
|
Mizoram
|
104
|
|
25.
|
Nagaland
|
503
|
|
26.
|
Orissa
|
19213
|
|
27.
|
Punjab
|
26823
|
|
28.
|
Pondicherry
|
2977
|
|
29.
|
Rajasthan
|
47318
|
|
30.
|
Sikkim
|
0
|
|
31.
|
Telangana
|
80702
|
|
32.
|
Tamil Nadu
|
118962
|
|
33.
|
Tripura
|
350
|
|
34.
|
Uttar Pradesh
|
70125
|
|
35.
|
Uttarakhand
|
5013
|
|
36.
|
West Bengal
|
187970
|
|
Total
|
1519836
|
|
Annexure –II
Annexure referred to in Part (a) of the Answer to
Lok Sabha Unstarred
Question No. 1043 for 04.12.2015
Number of closed
companies, State/UT-wise
|
Sl.
No.
|
State/UT
|
Year
2012-13
|
Year
2013-14
|
Year
2014-15
|
Year
2015-16
(upto 26.11.2015)
|
|
1.
|
Andaman & Nicobar Islands
|
0
|
2
|
0
|
0
|
|
2.
|
Andhra Pradesh
|
36
|
287
|
481
|
181
|
|
3.
|
Arunachal Pradesh
|
9
|
11
|
0
|
2
|
|
4.
|
Assam
|
118
|
193
|
29
|
44
|
|
5.
|
Bihar
|
26
|
3
|
115
|
191
|
|
6.
|
Chandigarh
|
464
|
110
|
359
|
145
|
|
7.
|
Chhattisgarh
|
22
|
16
|
46
|
40
|
|
8.
|
Daman and Diu
|
0
|
3
|
1
|
2
|
|
9.
|
Delhi
|
2012
|
1726
|
3098
|
2900
|
|
10.
|
Dadar Nagar Haveli
|
0
|
2
|
6
|
4
|
|
11.
|
Goa
|
48
|
105
|
73
|
43
|
|
12.
|
Gujarat
|
342
|
619
|
739
|
867
|
|
13.
|
Himachal Pradesh
|
144
|
25
|
36
|
107
|
|
14.
|
Haryana
|
144
|
146
|
244
|
306
|
|
15.
|
Jharkhand
|
15
|
0
|
35
|
135
|
|
16.
|
Jammu and Kashmir
|
14
|
10
|
35
|
23
|
|
17.
|
Karnataka
|
63
|
920
|
1005
|
665
|
|
18.
|
Kerala
|
259
|
332
|
329
|
382
|
|
19.
|
Lakshadweep
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
20.
|
Maharashtra
|
2018
|
2188
|
2846
|
2118
|
|
21.
|
Meghalaya
|
19
|
16
|
5
|
4
|
|
22.
|
Manipur
|
5
|
3
|
0
|
1
|
|
23.
|
Madhya Pradesh
|
147
|
237
|
206
|
371
|
|
24.
|
Mizoram
|
10
|
7
|
0
|
0
|
|
25.
|
Nagaland
|
12
|
10
|
0
|
3
|
|
26.
|
Orissa
|
1182
|
221
|
415
|
52
|
|
27.
|
Punjab
|
1098
|
136
|
586
|
205
|
|
28.
|
Pondicherry
|
16
|
18
|
16
|
24
|
|
29.
|
Rajasthan
|
195
|
300
|
852
|
685
|
|
30.
|
Sikkim
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
31.
|
Telangana
|
0
|
0
|
6923
|
704
|
|
32.
|
Tamil Nadu
|
1367
|
1192
|
1031
|
1079
|
|
33.
|
Tripura
|
10
|
11
|
2
|
2
|
|
34.
|
Uttar Pradesh
|
200
|
173
|
553
|
996
|
|
35.
|
Uttarakhand
|
3
|
0
|
90
|
38
|
|
36.
|
West Bengal
|
4562
|
1796
|
1869
|
1611
|
*****
Annexure –III
Annexure referred to in Part (b) to (d) of the
Answer to Lok Sabha Unstarred
Question No. 1043 for 04.12.2015
Number of companies
struck off, State/UT-wise
|
Sl.
No.
|
State/UT
|
Year
2012-13
|
Year
2013-14
|
Year
2014-15
|
Year
2015-16
(upto 04.11.2015)
|
|
1.
|
Andaman & Nicobar Islands
|
0
|
2
|
0
|
0
|
|
2.
|
Andhra Pradesh
|
13
|
251
|
268
|
1
|
|
3.
|
Arunachal Pradesh
|
2
|
11
|
0
|
1
|
|
4.
|
Assam
|
71
|
190
|
25
|
31
|
|
5.
|
Bihar
|
25
|
3
|
133
|
157
|
|
6.
|
Chandigarh
|
364
|
107
|
337
|
120
|
|
7.
|
Chhattisgarh
|
4
|
20
|
28
|
0
|
|
8.
|
Daman and Diu
|
0
|
2
|
0
|
0
|
|
9.
|
Delhi
|
1307
|
1050
|
2020
|
1719
|
|
10.
|
Dadar Nagar Haveli
|
0
|
1
|
4
|
4
|
|
11.
|
Goa
|
22
|
86
|
50
|
0
|
|
12.
|
Gujarat
|
367
|
367
|
462
|
662
|
|
13.
|
Himachal Pradesh
|
146
|
35
|
21
|
94
|
|
14.
|
Haryana
|
96
|
123
|
195
|
207
|
|
15.
|
Jharkhand
|
11
|
0
|
100
|
57
|
|
16.
|
Jammu and Kashmir
|
5
|
19
|
25
|
0
|
|
17.
|
Karnataka
|
219
|
634
|
829
|
587
|
|
18.
|
Kerala
|
253
|
319
|
321
|
361
|
|
19.
|
Lakshadweep
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
20.
|
Maharashtra
|
1131
|
1356
|
1756
|
890
|
|
21.
|
Meghalaya
|
14
|
15
|
4
|
3
|
|
22.
|
Manipur
|
4
|
3
|
0
|
0
|
|
23.
|
Madhya Pradesh
|
0
|
245
|
194
|
286
|
|
24.
|
Mizoram
|
1
|
7
|
0
|
0
|
|
25.
|
Nagaland
|
8
|
10
|
0
|
3
|
|
26.
|
Orissa
|
1248
|
226
|
431
|
46
|
|
27.
|
Punjab
|
771
|
145
|
558
|
171
|
|
28.
|
Pondicherry
|
13
|
17
|
20
|
7
|
|
29.
|
Rajasthan
|
166
|
266
|
569
|
548
|
|
30.
|
Sikkim
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
31.
|
Telangana
|
111
|
554
|
90
|
0
|
|
32.
|
Tamil Nadu
|
695
|
932
|
1017
|
450
|
|
33.
|
Tripura
|
7
|
11
|
2
|
2
|
|
34.
|
Uttar Pradesh
|
154
|
433
|
693
|
412
|
|
35.
|
Uttarakhand
|
0
|
0
|
84
|
33
|
|
36.
|
West Bengal
|
3880
|
1662
|
1147
|
725
|
|
Total
|
11108
|
9102
|
11383
|
7577
|
|
*****
Participation of CCI in the
Conference
Under the mandate given by
section 49 of the Competition Act, 2002, Competition Commission of India (CCI)
takes measures to engage in competition advocacy, creating awareness and
imparting training on competition issues. This is done, inter-alia, by
participation of Chairperson, Members and officials of the Commission in
various conferences, seminars and workshops organized by various stakeholders.
CCI, however, has not participated in any commercial event.
During financial year 2015-16, CCI has, till date, participated in 55 advocacy events, out of which 04 have been organized by ASSOCHAM. The invites to such conferences are from business associations/stakeholders and the Commission does not engage with the individual sponsors, if any, and members of the associations.
This was stated by Shri Arun Jaitley, Minister of Corporate Affairs in written reply to a question in the Lok Sabha.
During financial year 2015-16, CCI has, till date, participated in 55 advocacy events, out of which 04 have been organized by ASSOCHAM. The invites to such conferences are from business associations/stakeholders and the Commission does not engage with the individual sponsors, if any, and members of the associations.
This was stated by Shri Arun Jaitley, Minister of Corporate Affairs in written reply to a question in the Lok Sabha.
*****
CSR for War Widows and War
Veterans
Schedule VII of the Companies
Act, 2013, that enlists the eligible Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR)
activities, already covers, inter-alia, ‘measures for the benefit of armed
forces veterans, war widows and their dependents’ at item no. (vi). However,
the decision to allocate CSR fund across various items of Schedule VII is taken
by the Board of the Company under the provisions of the Act.
This was stated by Shri Arun Jaitley, Minister of Corporate Affairs in written reply to a question in the Lok Sabha.
This was stated by Shri Arun Jaitley, Minister of Corporate Affairs in written reply to a question in the Lok Sabha.
*****
Post a Comment