Open Access Research Article
White Black Legal – International Law Journal · ISSN 2581-8503
CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY: ANALYZING THE CONTEMPORARY TRENDS
Read the Full Research Paper
Access the complete open-access article in PDF format. No login is required.
Abstract
CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY: ANALYZING
THE CONTEMPORARY TRENDS
AUTHORED BY - DEVESH
DUBEY & HARSHA YADAV
Introduction
“With the passage of Section 135 of
the Companies Act, 2013[1]
(the ‘Act’,) India became the first nation to make a corporate social
responsibility (‘CSR’) framework mandatory for certain types of businesses.
This approach was based on firms ‘voluntarily’ participating in CSR
initiatives, with non-compliance requiring just an explanation (i.e., the
‘comply or explain’ concept).[2]
The Ministry of Corporate Affairs’ (‘MCA’) recent announcement of several
revisions to the CSR system has considerably reduced corporations’ autonomy in
mapping out and carrying out their corporate social responsibility, and has
moved away from the ‘compliance or explain’ regime. The purpose of this article
is to look at the major changes brought about by the modifications, as well as
their influence on the”comply or explain” system”.
The
first section of the article discusses how the modification affects the usage
of unspent CSR funds. The second section looks at the different types of CSR
spending and the challenges that corporations face in implementing them. The
final section emphasizes the importance of the company’s board of directors and
CSR committee. The fourth section looks at the issues that have arisen as a
result of the present CSR system that have not been addressed by the amendment
or for which no suitable explanation has been offered. The writers’ closing
comments are addressed in the last section.
Cases
(a)
National
Textile Workers’ Union v. P.R. Ramakrishnan: The
Supreme Court’s ruling in 1983 was the first to recognize Corporate Social
Responsibility as a concept. While deciding a dispute between workers and a
corporation, the Supreme Court unequivocally said that the conventional concept
that a firm is the property of its shareholders is a lie. Thus, this
imperatively bought the concept of CSR into the Indian legal system.
(b)
Chiranjit Lal Chowdhuri
v. Union of India: The court
mentioned that one should bear in mind that a corporation engaged in the
production of a commodity vitally essential to the community has a social
character of its own, and it must not be regarded as the concern of those who
invest their money in it. Thus, regardless of who the investors are, a company
has to perform its CSR obligations by its own self.
Legislative Acts
(a)
Section 135, Companies
Act 2013:
“The
Companies (Corporate Social Responsibility) Amendment Rules, 2021, will come
into effect on January 1, 2021, and will alter the current Companies (Corporate
Social Responsibility) Rules 2014. Under the Companies Act of 2013, companies
with a net worth of Rs 500 crores or more, or with a turnover of Rs 1000 crores
or more, or with a net profit of Rs 5 crores or more during any financial year
are required to form a corporate social responsibility (CSR) committee of the
board of directors, with at least one of the directors being an independent
director. The board must disclose the membership of the CSR committee in its
report for the committee to be effective”.
Books
(a) Corporate Social
Responsibility in India by Sanjay K. Agarwal: In India, Corporate Social
Responsibility is likely the first complete, well-researched book on the topic.
To highlight the gap between Indian company requirements and present practises,
the author offers Indian examples, case studies, and CSR role models from the
Indian sector. Economically developed country practises and research have also
been widely adopted. As the Indian economy expands into foreign markets, it
will be critical to combine CSR with corporate objectives in order to ensure
long-term viability and a positive economic, social, and environmental effect.
The book aims to demonstrate how CSR may be utilised as a marketing tool and
for commercial gains, in addition to helping readers grasp the meaning of
company beyond financial metrics. It covers the whole history of CSR, from its
beginnings as charity to its current status as a legal need for firms to be CSR
conscious.
(b)
Corporate Social
Responsibility: Concept, Cases and Trends by Prabhakar Paleri: In today’s
globalised world, where traditional management is giving way to responsible
strategic governance within the closely interconnected trinity of business,
government, and society, corporate social responsibility (CSR) is a hot issue.
This book serves as a textbook for students, academics, scholars, governments,
officials, and other interested parties who want to learn more about the idea
and how to use it in their own contexts. Csr is growing rapidly across
organisations with distinct cultures, personalities, processes, and stages of
growth. As a result, it must be investigated. While firms are vertically
focused and conceptualising cutting-edge CSR intervention tactics, the
government is also in the spotlight by providing the notion, which originated
as a duty, with a legislative mandate. This action is intended to benefit the
business sector. The framework that will be used to create and standardise CSR
interventional procedures inside the social system, as well as increase the
much-desired ethical transparency. When the Companies Act of 2013 was passed,
India became the first nation to legislate CSR. This book covers all of these
topics and more. With the goal of providing readers with a large amount of
freedom to manoeuvre inside the expanding notion of CSR in a”how to
thinking" style and apply it to any company in an inventive manner
appropriate to the current business climate.
With the introduction of section 135 of
the Companies Act, 2013, India established itself as the pioneer in obligating
a corporate social responsibility framework for specific categories of
companies. This framework initially relied on companies choosing to engage in
CSR activities voluntarily, with non-compliant companies merely required to
provide an explanation. However, the recent announcement by the Ministry of
Corporate Affairs (MCA) regarding various changes to the CSR regulations has
substantially limited companies' freedom to define and execute their corporate
social responsibility initiatives. This marks a departure from the previous
'comply or explain' approach.
Numerous aspects of the
Amendment come with various challenges. While the CSR policy has been expanded,
the significance of CSR has diminished, with greater obligations placed on the
board of directors. Consequently, the new rules have placed a heavy burden on
companies to overhaul their current CSR frameworks to align with the Amendment,
marking a substantial departure from the previous 'comply or explain' approach.
(a)
How
CSR’s unspent amount is utilized and what are the legal provisions for the
same?
(b)
What
is the amount of discretion that the Board of Directors of a Company exercises
in allocating CSR projects?
(c)
What
is the takeaway of the recent amendment concerning the unspent CSR amount?
(d)
What
are the administrative overheads that are required for CSR to be exercised?
This
study is based on a historical and descriptive approach i.e. documents and
published materials as are relevant to the present study have been analyzed.
Secondary data is relied upon like books, journals & various websites. “The
research has been conducted by using a pragmatic approach and in accordance
with majorly doctrinal research methodology, whereby, various triangulation
methods have been used which include”: -
a)
Reform
oriented research (Analysis of existing provisions and making suggestions for
future changes);
b)
Methodological
triangulation (Use of multiple methods for getting a good result such as
reference to various journals, and different books).
This research project uses
only the doctrinal method of study.
Corporate Social Responsibility: A
Brief
The significance of corporate social
responsibility has never been more pronounced. The impact of companies on our
world has become increasingly evident in recent years. However, the reasons
behind why businesses should practice socially responsible behavior remain
unclear. This lack of clarity stems from a limited understanding of the
fundamental nature of corporations.
Many corporate leaders believe they
have a moral obligation to engage in socially responsible activities. They
often present two arguments to support their engagement in such activities.
Some managers argue that this conduct is legitimate because it benefits the
company, while others assert that it is simply the right thing to do.[3]
This explanation is widely accepted
and has a solid legal basis, as socially responsible actions are considered
acceptable when they align with a business's commercial objectives, as
established in the famous case of Dodge v. Ford Motor Co.[4]
According to case law, for-profit companies must operate with the primary goal
of making a profit.
However, this legal perspective does
not fully clarify why firms should participate in such activities unless it
directly contributes to profit maximization. For instance, most business
managers would struggle to justify choosing a socially responsible course of
action over a non-socially responsible one if both options yielded the same
level of profit. Furthermore, corporate executives may find it challenging to
explain why a company should prioritize socially responsible behavior when its
impact on profitability is uncertain.
As a result, many business executives
resort to the second rationale for engaging in socially responsible activities:
the belief that it is simply the right thing to do. However, this rationale
often relies on the intuition of corporate leaders who believe that being
perceived as socially conscious can lead to better outcomes for their
companies. In summary, while the idea that firms should engage in socially
responsible conduct is widely accepted, it remains far from fully comprehended.
Corporate Social Responsibility in
India
The
Companies Act of 2013 in India didn't mark the inception of corporate social
responsibility (CSR) in the country. Over time, the concept of CSR has evolved,
transitioning from a focus on corporate philanthropy to the recognition of CSR.
Corporate
Social Responsibility (CSR) is a societal expectation for businesses to operate
ethically and contribute to the economic well-being of society. It can be
defined as "a company's sense of responsibility for the community and the
environment (both ecological and social) in which it operates," as per
dictionary definitions. This ethical responsibility extends beyond improving
the quality of life for employees and includes the local community and society
as a whole. CSR is a business concept in which corporations consider
sociological and environmental factors while conducting business and engaging
with stakeholders. Its objective is to strike a balance between environmental
and social obligations to society while meeting stakeholder expectations.
“CSR,
a strategic corporate management concept, differs fundamentally from
philanthropy, which is purely a humanitarian idea. CSR's contribution to
society not only enhances a company's reputation but also serves as the
foundation for a business concept. It aims to align private firms with the goal
of long-term global development, going beyond profit as the sole objective.
When correctly implemented, CSR can be highly advantageous to a business,
improving access to capital and markets, increasing revenue, reducing
operational costs, enhancing efficiency, fostering customer loyalty, and
assisting in decision-making and risk management”.
“The Supreme Court’s ruling in 1983
was the first to recognize Corporate Social Responsibility as a concept.[5]
While deciding a dispute between workers and a corporation, the Supreme Court
unequivocally said that the conventional concept that a firm is the property of
its shareholders is a lie. Today’s social scientists and philosophers see a
business as a living, alive, and dynamic social organism with strong and deep
ties to the rest of the society in which it operates”. The Supreme Court also
cited a 1950 ruling by the same court, which stated that”we should bear in mind that a corporation engaged in the production of
a commodity vitally essential to the community has a social character of its
own, and it must not be regarded as the concern of those who invest their money
in it”.[6]
Legal Provision for CSR in India
History of the CSR Regime in India
Under the Companies Act of 1956 and its
predecessors, there was no official recognition of CSR. Corporate Social
Responsibility Voluntary Guidelines, 2009 was the first CSR guideline published
in 2009. National Voluntary Guidelines on Business’s Social, Environmental, and
Economic Responsibilities broadened the scope even further. The Companies Bill
of 2011 paved the way for official acknowledgment of CSR.
“CSR
was not included in the Companies Bill, 2009 when it was first tabled in the
Lok Sabha. When the measure was sent to this committee, the standing committee
on finance suggested a provision on CSR. When the Companies Bill, 2009 was
superseded by the Companies Bill, 2011, which was tabled in the Lok Sabha on
December 14, 2011, the provision was added into the Companies Bill, 2011. The
Companies Bill, 2011, was referred to the standing committee once again, and
various revisions were requested. The revisions were properly integrated, and
the Companies Bill, 2011 was approved by the Lok Sabha in 2012 as the Companies
Bill, 2012, and then by the Rajya Sabha in 2013 as the Companies Bill, 2013. On
August 19, 2013, the Companies Bill obtained Presidential assent”.
For
the first time anywhere in the world, the Companies Act of 2013 became a
historic Act by recognizing CSR as a legislative provision. The current
provisions of section 135 are as follows:
1. “Companies
with a net worth of Rs 500 crore or more, a turnover of Rs 1,000 crore or more,
or a net profit of Rs 5 crore or more in the previous financial year must form
a CSR committee of the board of directors”.
2. The
CSR committee will be in charge of developing, recommending, and monitoring the
company’s CSR policy.
3. The
board must guarantee that the firm spends at least 2% of its average net
earnings over the past three years on CSR initiatives, as outlined in Schedule
VII.
4. Local
areas and regions surrounding it where it works will be given priority.
5. Any
failure to spend the allocated funds must be explained in detail in the board’s
report.
“The
modification to Section 135 has yet to take effect. Sections 134 and 450, in
addition to section 135, play a significant role. Section 134(3)(o) establishes
the firm’s requirement to disclose information regarding its corporate social
responsibility policy and measures made throughout the year as part of the
Board of Directors’ report, which is attached to the financial statements
brought before the company in a general meeting. Failure to make disclosures as
required by section 134(3)(o) may result in a monetary penalty (8). The firm
shall be fined not less than fifty thousand rupees but not more than
twenty-five lakh rupees, and any official of the company who is in default
shall be sentenced to three years in jail or a fine of not less than fifty thousand
rupees but not more than five lakh rupees, or both”.
“There
is no particular mechanism in place that penalizes failing to form a CSR
committee or spend the necessary amount as required by section 135 of the Act.
Section 450, on the other hand, governs punishment in the absence of a defined
penalty or punishment. Section 450 punishes the company and every officer of
the company who is in default or any other person with a fine of up to ten
thousand rupees, and where the contravention continues, with a further fine of
up to one thousand rupees for each day after the first during which the
contravention continues”.
Recent CSR Amendments in India
Non-compliance
with CSR rules is planned to be criminalised under the Companies (Amendment)
Act of 2019. If a firm fails to comply with the requirements provided in the
new revised Section 135 of the Companies Act, 2013, it will be subject to a
penalty of more than INR 50,000 but less than INR 25 lakhs. Each official of a
non-compliant corporation will face a fine of more than INR 50,000 but less
than INR 5 lakhs, or up to three years in jail, or both.
Companies who are unable to spend the
necessary amount on CSR activities shall transfer the unspent money to a fund
listed in Schedule VII within 6 months after the financial year’s end,
according to newly modified section 135. If there is an ongoing project,
however, the remaining funds will be moved to the Unspent Corporate Social
Responsibility Account. The money has to be used towards a project within three
years of it being transferred to the fund. The federal government will decide
whether a project is continuing or not. It’s vital to highlight that the
central government will decide what constitutes an ongoing initiative. As a
result, the central government may tighten the noose even further on CSR
expenditure firms by establishing a high bar for classifying a project as an
ongoing one.
How Companies approach CSR
“It
isn't true that the government or different offices don't joke around about
CSR. Indeed, even organizations have done amazingly well in the field of CSR.
As per the report of KPMG worldwide, organizations in India have spent Rs
7,536.3 crore on corporate social obligation (CSR) exercises in 2017-18 which
is a 47% increment when contrasted with 2014-15. The combined consumption spent
by top 100 organizations from 2014-15 to 2017-18 is about Rs 26,385 crore and
the typical sum spent per organization has seen a significant increment from
76.1 crore to 58.8 crore, which is a 29% increment. Energy and power areas have
spent the most elevated sum towards CSR at Rs 2,464.96 crore followed by BFSI
at Rs 1,352.67 crore, client items at Rs 635.41 crore, IT counseling and
programming at Rs 1,100 crore and mining and metal at Rs 647.12 crore”.[7]
The number of companies allocating
less than 2 percent of their CSR funds has significantly decreased by 37
percent, from 52 companies in 2014-15 to 33 companies in 2017-18. The unspent
amount has also reduced, going from Rs 1,738 crore in 2014-15 to Rs 989 crore
in 2017-18. Spending on education and healthcare has notably risen from Rs.
1249 crore to Rs. 2404 crore, marking a 92 percent increase. Additionally, the
representation of women in CSR committees has increased, with 67 percent of
activated CSR initiatives including women.
Despite the telecommunications sector
being burdened by debt, its CSR spending has increased by 400 percent, while
pharmaceutical companies have witnessed a 234 percent rise in their CSR
expenditure. Public sector undertakings (PSUs) accounted for 31 percent of the
total projects, with non-PSUs representing the remaining 78 percent.
The top five states where CSR
projects are most prevalent are Maharashtra, Uttar Pradesh, Tamil Nadu,
Karnataka, and Odisha. These states collectively account for 31 percent of all
CSR projects and initiatives across the country.
Unspent CSR Amount: What does it hold
to the”comply or explain” regime?
“Any company with a net worth of Rs
500 crores or more, a turnover of Rs 1000 crores or more, or a net profit of Rs
5 crores or more in the immediately preceding financial year must establish a
CSR committee as per Section 135 (1) of the Act. Additionally, such a
corporation must allocate a minimum of 2% of its average net income over the
past three financial years for CSR initiatives”[8].
The amendment clarifies that if a company has not completed three financial
years since its inception, the average net profit during the company's
existence will be used to calculate its CSR obligation.
If a company fails to fulfill its CSR
obligations in accordance with the aforementioned rules, it “must transfer the
unspent funds to a fund specified in Schedule VII of the Act within six months
after the end of the financial year. Currently, no separate fund has been
established for this purpose, and any funds listed in Schedule VII of the Act
can be used to transfer unspent funds. These funds include the Clean Ganga
Fund, Prime Minister's National Relief Fund, PM Cares Fund, and any other
central government fund aimed at socio-economic development and the welfare of
marginalized groups, minorities, and women (referred to as the "Central
Government Fund"). Additionally, companies are required to explain in the
director's report why the mandated CSR amount was not spen”t[9].
Any unspent funds from an
"ongoing project" undertaken by a company to fulfill its CSR
obligation must be transferred to a special account called the 'Unspent
Corporate Social Responsibility Account' ('Unspent Account') in any scheduled
bank within thirty days. The company must utilize the unspent funds in
accordance with its CSR strategy within three years after transferring them to
the Unspent Account, or they will be transferred to a Central Government Fund[10].
However, the requirement to transfer
unspent funds raises several concerns. Firstly, CSR aims to involve companies
in social development and promote private-sector innovation. Transferring
remaining CSR funds to a Central Government Fund essentially amounts to cash
distribution and contradicts the purpose of CSR expenditure. Additionally, the
High-Level Committees responsible for assessing the CSR system have recommended
phasing out payments to the Central Government Fund.
Secondly, the fundamental motivation
behind the CSR rule was to enable strategic CSR expenditure rather than mere
charitable giving. “The three-year limit on spending on 'ongoing projects' may
lead companies to divert CSR spending from long-term sustainable initiatives to
smaller projects or contributions to the Central Government Fund, potentially
reducing the quality of CSR investment”[11].
Thirdly, companies, particularly
smaller or newly established ones, may encounter implementation challenges with
CSR initiatives, resulting in non-spending or under-spending of the CSR budget.
These challenges may include delays in identifying suitable projects, lack of
prior experience, technical difficulties, difficulty in formulating an
effective CSR strategy, and implementation in remote areas, which can be
time-consuming. Requiring companies to transfer unspent CSR funds to the
Central Government Fund if they haven't identified an "ongoing
project" or imposing a three-year deadline for "ongoing project"
completion could negatively impact CSR planning, allocation, and expenditure.
Furthermore, the amendment does not provide an option for companies to request
an extension for completing “ongoing projects” with adequate justifications.
This approach is particularly burdensome for smaller and newly established
businesses that lack statutory time extensions for fund utilization and project
completion[12].
Lastly, under section 135(7)[13]
of the Act (the sole punitive provision under the CSR system), violations
related to the transfer of unspent funds result in a monetary penalty for the
company and each defaulting official. The amendment eliminates the provision
for imprisonment of “officers in default” and replaces it with a monetary fine.
However, this penalty clause applies only to violations of sections 135(5)[14]
and 135(6)[15] of the Act. Other
non-compliances, such as the failure to establish a CSR committee, the failure
of the CSR committee to formulate a CSR strategy, and the failure of a
company's board to oversee CSR activities properly, among others, will not be
covered by this penalty provision. Non-compliance with other CSR requirements
may result in a residual penalty under section 450 of the Act[16].
Therefore, companies are primarily
required to spend the statutorily mandated amount and transfer any unspent
funds to the Central Government Fund to effectively avoid penalties. In this
regard, the emphasis is more on compliance with the statutory requirement
rather than the quality of CSR expenditure. The “compliance or explain” [17]system
remains intact to a certain extent. Additionally, since the maximum penalty is
Rs 1 crore, larger companies (in terms of net worth, net profit, and revenue)
may opt to pay a fine rather than undergo lengthy CSR compliance processes. As
a result, enforcing this penalty may lead to a one-time payment of CSR funds,
undermining the purpose of using CSR as a tool for long-term societal benefit.
This penalty imposition is particularly challenging for smaller or newly
established businesses, which may struggle with CSR implementation. Smaller
companies and recently established ones should be exempted from these
penalties, and the initial years should be viewed as a learning period.
Board of Directors and their role
towards fulfillment of CSR: Analysis
The
greater responsibility given to “the company’s board of directors for the
fulfillment of its CSR duties is one of the significant developments brought
about by the Amendment, which has resulted in a divergence from the ‘comply or
explain’ paradigm. Prior to the Amendment, the board had to adopt and include
the CSR policy in the board report, as well as ensure that the firm carried out
the CSR policy’s actions, which were related to the areas or topics listed in
Schedule VII of the Act. However, if the corporation fails to spend the
statutory CSR amount, the board’s sole requirement is to publish the reasons
for the failure, with no penalty placed on the board. This was in accordance
with the logic of the previous ‘comply or explain’ system, which deemed yearly
statutory disclosures to be a sufficient check for CSR compliance and punished
corporations only if they did not spend the required amount and failed to
disclose”.[18]
“The Amendment adds to the board’s
responsibilities: (i) transferring unspent CSR funds to the Central Government
Fund (in cases where the company does not have a ‘ongoing project’); (ii)
extending a single-year CSR project to a ‘ongoing project’ after providing
reasonable justification; (iii) monitoring the implementation of a ‘ongoing
project’ and making appropriate modifications for the project’s implementation
within the prescribed time period; and (iv) ensuring that as a result, the
board’s total duty for CSR monitoring and execution has expanded significantly,
potentially putting the board under a lot of strain. Prior to the Amendment,
the CSR committee was responsible for developing, monitoring, and proposing CSR
policy and a thorough action plan, as well as recommending CSR spending.
However, in light of the additional responsibilities placed on the board, the
CSR committee’s function has been restricted to policy-making, with the
majority of CSR implementation falling to the company’s board”.
Takeaways from the Amendment
CSR spending in local areas
A
corporation that engages in CSR initiatives is required to prioritize the
communities in which it works. The Standing Committee on Finance’s 37th report[19]
noted that local CSR spending was insignificant in comparison to CSR spending
in other regions, and advised that this requirement be strictly enforced.
Companies should comply with this requirement, according to a recent MCA
clarification.[20] However, the HLC 2018
found that, as local CSR spending increased, CSR spending became concentrated
in specific geographic regions and biased towards industrialized states.
According
to the HLC 2018, when this clause is read in conjunction with the items in
Schedule VII, it is obvious that CSR investment is not meant to be focused in
certain geographic regions. The HLC 2018 also suggested that local CSR spending
should be prioritized, and that CSR spending should be prioritized by comparing
local CSR spending to other CSR expenditures. The MCA has not yet issued any
explanation on the required nature of local CSR spending, and in the present
situation, a firm must provide strict priority to local regions, and
enterprises that violate the Act may face monetary penalties.
Tax exemptions and CSR expenditure
The
absence of an unified tax structure for actions conducted by firms in
fulfillment of their CSR duties has been a problematic component of the CSR
regime. The Finance Act of 2014 stated that CSR spending by businesses cannot
be considered as business expenditure under section 37(1) of the Income Tax Act
of 1961 (‘ITA’). This was because CSR spending was considered as a way for a
corporation to put its money to good use, and deducting it would essentially be
the government supporting such spending.[21]
“The restriction under section 37 of
the ITA, on the other hand, does not preclude businesses from claiming
deductions under other sections of the ITA (such as sections 30-36 of the ITA)
for various activities listed in Schedule VII of the Act, such as rural
development projects and scientific research.[22]
Donations to the Prime Minister’s National Relief Fund, for example, are
completely deductible under section 80G of the Internal Revenue Code. Companies
may be enticed to focus their CSR operations in regions or sectors where they
may claim tax benefits as a result of these exemptions.[23]
To combat this, activities included in Schedule VII of the Act should have
consistent tax advantages, and CSR spending should be allowed to be deducted
when calculating taxable income”.[24]
Suggestive Remarks and Conclusion
The
HLC 2015 and HLC 2018 have underscored the appropriate utilization of CSR cash,
especially when guarantee of maltreatment of CSR subsidizing and wasteful CSR
consumption have surfaced. To that point, large numbers of the changes
delivered by the Alteration have endeavored to address such maltreatment and
work on the CSR consumption process. A couple of positive changes include: I
requiring carrying out organizations to enlist with the Focal Government, which
will further develop responsibility and may decrease re-steering of CSR
subsidizes back to the organization; (ii) expecting that capital resources
utilized for CSR purposes can't be held in the organization's name, which
mirrors the CSR ethos that society ought to be the recipients of CSR projects and
the organization is denied from benefitting from CSR; and (iii) directing
effect evaluations for CSR projects for explicit classes of organizations
empowers organizations to survey the adequacy of their CSR spending; (iv)
permitting organizations that spend more than the necessary add up to set off
the overabundance sums inside endorsed courses of events gives organizations
greater adaptability in picking and designating CSR ventures; and (vi)
permitting organizations to employ global associations to help with their CSR
projects gives organizations greater adaptability in picking and distributing
CSR projects.
Notwithstanding,
as recently referenced, a considerable lot of the Revision's arrangements are
hampered by various impediments. However the CSR strategy has been extended,
the occupation of CSR has taken a secondary lounge as the top managerial staff
has been given more prominent obligations. The objective of laying out the CSR
system was to hold firms' independence while empowering them to take part in
CSR exercises individually. Presently, the required expenditure of CSR sums (or
the exchange of unspent CSR sums), the danger of financial authorizations for
non-expenditure of CSR, and expanded obstruction in the job of a leading group
of legal administrators corresponding to CSR execution have stripped
organizations of their independence comparable to CSR execution, bringing about
a critical takeoff from the 'consent or make sense of' system. Thus, the new
system has put a weighty strain on organizations to adjust their ongoing CSR
methodology to conform to the Change.
Bibliography
Cases
1.
Chiranjit Lal Chowdhuri v. Union of India AIR 1951 SC 41 :
1950 SCR 869 : 1951 SCJ 29.
2.
Dodge v. Ford Motor Co., 170 N.W. 668, 684 (Mich. 1919).
3.
National Textile Workers’ Union v. P.R. Ramakrishnan, (1983)
1 SCC 228: 1983 SCC (L&S) 72 : 1983 SCC (Tax) 2.
Legislative Material
1.
The Companies (Corporate Social Responsibility Policy) Rules,
2014, Annexure II.
2.
The Companies (Corporate Social Responsibility Policy) Rules,
2014, Rule 2(1)(b).
3.
The Companies (Corporate Social Responsibility Policy) Rules,
2014, Rule 7(2).
4.
The Companies (Corporate Social Responsibility Policy) Rules,
2014, Rule 7(3).
5.
The Companies (Corporate Social Responsibility Policy) Rules,
2014, Rule 7(4).
6.
The Companies (Corporate Social Responsibility Policy) Rules,
2014, Rule 8(3)(c)...... 20
7.
The Companies Act, 2013, § 450, No.18, Acts of Parliament,
2013 (India).
8.
The Companies Act, 2013, §135(5), No.18, Acts of Parliament,
2013 (India).
9.
The Companies Act, 2013, §135(6), No.18, Acts of Parliament,
2013 (India).
10. The Companies
Act, 2013, §135(7), No.18, Acts of Parliament, 2013 (India).
11. The Companies
Act, 2013, §135, No.18, Acts of Parliament, 2013 (India).
12. The Finance Act, 2014, § 13,
No. 2, Acts of Parliament, 2014 (India).
Books and Journal Articles
1.
Joe W. Pitts III, Corporate Social Responsibility: Current
Status and Future Evolution, 6 RUTGERS J.L. & PUB. POL’Y 334, 343 (2009).
2.
Satish Y Deodhar, India’s
Mandatory CSR, Process of Compliance and Channels of Spending, 9 (Indian
Institute of Management Ahmendabad India, Working Paper No. 2015-05-01, 2015),
available at
https://web.iima.ac.in/assets/snippets/workingpaperpdf/16048663442015-05-01.pdf.
Miscellaneous
1.
Anil Baijal, Report of the High Level Committee (to
suggest measures for improved monitoring of the implementation of Corporate
Social Responsibility policies), 15 (September, 2015).
2.
Committee on Public Undertakings (2015-16), Corporate
Social Responsibility in Select Public Sector Undertakings (CPSUs), 19,
(December, 2015), available at
http://164.100.47.193/lsscommittee/Public%20Undertakings/16_Public_Undertakings_8.pdf.
3.
India CSR Network, Corporate
Social Responsibility a leap of Faith for the Government: Sachin Pilot,
Minister Corporate Affairs, December 20, 2012, available at
https://indiacsr.in/corporate-social-responsibility-a-leap-of-faith-for-the-government-sachin-pilot-minister-corporate-affairs/
4.
Injeti Srinivas, Report of the High Level Committee on
Corporate Social Responsibility 2018, 15 (August, 2019).
5.
Injeti Srinivas, Report of the High Level Committee on
Corporate Social Responsibility 2018, 71 (August, 2019).
6.
KPMG International, India’s CSR reporting survey 2019,
available at
https://home.kpmg/in/en/home/insights/2020/02/india-s-csr-reporting-survey-2019.html.
7.
Ministry of Corporate Affairs, Frequently Asked Questions on
CSR Cell, available at
https://www.mca.gov.in/MinistryV2/faq+on+csr+cell.html.
8.
Ministry of Corporate Affairs, General Circular No. 06/2018
(Issued on May 28, 2018), available at
https://www.mca.gov.in/Ministry/pdf/GeneralCircular2805_29052018.pdf.
9.
Ministry of Finance, Circular No. 1/2015 (Issued on January
21, 2015), available at
https://www.incometaxindia.gov.in/communications/circular/circular1_2015.pdf.
10. Standing
Committee on Finance ,Report on Companies Bill, 2011, 59 (June
2012).
11. Standing
Committee on Finance ,Report on The Companies (Amendment) Bill,
2016, 45 (December 2016).
[3] “Joe W. Pitts III, Corporate
Social Responsibility: Current Status and Future Evolution, 6 RUTGERS J.L.
& PUB. POL’Y 334, 343 (2009)”.
[5] “National Textile
Workers’ Union v. P.R. Ramakrishnan, (1983) 1 SCC 228: 1983 SCC (L&S) 72 :
1983 SCC (Tax) 2”.
[7] KPMG
International, India’s CSR reporting survey 2019, available at https://home.kpmg/in/en/home/insights/2020/02/india-s-csr-reporting-survey-2019.html.
[10] “Injeti Srinivas, Report
of the High Level Committee on Corporate Social Responsibility 2018, 15
(August, 2019)”.
[11]“Anil Baijal, Report of the High
Level Committee (to suggest measures for improved monitoring of the
implementation of Corporate Social Responsibility policies), 15 (September,
2015)”.
[12]“Committee on Public Undertakings (2015-16), Corporate Social Responsibility in Select Public Sector Undertakings
(CPSUs), 19, (December, 2015), available at http://164.100.47.193/lsscommittee/Public%20Undertakings/16_Public_Undertakings_8.pdf”.
[16] The Companies Act, 2013, No.18,
Acts of Parliament, 2013 (India).
[18] “India CSR Network, Corporate Social Responsibility a leap of
Faith for the Government: Sachin Pilot, Minister Corporate Affairs,
December 20, 2012, available at https://indiacsr.in/corporate-social-responsibility-a-leap-of-faith-for-the-government-sachin-pilot-minister-corporate-affairs/”.
[19] “Standing Committee on Finance ,Report
on The Companies (Amendment) Bill, 2016, 45 (December 2016)”.
[20] “Ministry of Corporate Affairs,
General Circular No. 06/2018 (Issued on May 28, 2018), available at https://www.mca.gov.in/Ministry/pdf/GeneralCircular2805_29052018.pdf.”
[22] Ministry of Finance, Circular No.
1/2015 (Issued on January 21, 2015), available at https://www.incometaxindia.gov.in/communications/circular/circular1_2015.pdf.
[23] Ministry of Corporate Affairs,
Frequently Asked Questions on CSR Cell, available at https://www.mca.gov.in/MinistryV2/faq+on+csr+cell.html.
[24] Satish Y Deodhar, India’s Mandatory CSR, Process of Compliance
and Channels of Spending, 9 (Indian Institute of Management Ahmendabad
India, Working Paper No. 2015-05-01, 2015), available at https://web.iima.ac.in/assets/snippets/workingpaperpdf/16048663442015-05-01.pdf.
How to Cite This Article
DEVESH DUBEY, HARSHA YADAV, CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY: ANALYZING THE CONTEMPORARY TRENDS., White Black Legal – International Law Journal, ISSN: 2581-8503, Vol. Volume 4, Issue VOLUME 4 ISSUE 2, October 2026, pp. 664-682. Available at: https://www.whiteblacklegal.co.in/details/corporate-social-responsibility-analyzing-the-contemporary-trends
Author & Publication Record
Authors: DEVESH DUBEY & HARSHA YADAV
Registration ID: 107169 | Published Paper ID: WBL7169 & WBL7170
Year: Oct- 2026 | Volume: 4 | Issue: 2
Approved ISSN: 2581-8503 | Country: Delhi, India
Page No.: 664-682
Full Text Preview
Open in New Tab
Copied