A quick analysis of the Scheme is available at- https://youtu.be/lXUb4l8srM8
Vinod Kothari & Company
By CS Vinita Nair, Senior Partner| Vinod Kothari & Company
We are in a shut-down mode, but companies still need to work, as business, and of course, life, has to move on. There are lots and lots of matters in the corporate world where board decisions are required. There are matters which mandatorily require board resolutions to be passed in a meeting of the board, and these matters may be quite frequent, for example, borrowing, lending, investing of funds, issue of securities, etc.. Additionally, there may be lots of other matters where approval of boards/ audit committee meetings or other committee meetings may be required.
Munmi Phukon and Tanvi Rastogi
Ministry vide its Notification dated 5th June, 2015 issued certain modifications/ exemptions/ exceptions for Government Companies on certain provisions of the Companies Act, 2013. One such exemption was with respect to the provisions pertaining to related party transactions (RPTs). Vide the said Notification, Government Companies were provided relaxation from obtaining the prior shareholders’ approval as required under the first proviso to section 188(1) and consequently, from the restriction on the affirmative voting by the related parties for (a) contracts/ arrangements with other Government Company(ies) and (b) where the Government Company is not a listed company, contracts/ arrangements with related parties other Government companies as mentioned above, if prior approval of the Ministry/ Department of the Central Government (CG) or State Government (SG) administrative in charge of the Company is obtained.
The aforesaid Notification has been revisited by the Ministry by issuing a further Notification dated 2nd March, 2020 (2020 Notification) whereby the said exemptions have been extended to the contracts/ arrangements by the Government Companies with CG/ SG/ any combination thereof.
Before analysing the relevance of the 2020 Notification, one has to understand the related parties from a Government Company’s perspective. This article analyses the provisions of the Companies Act, 2013 (Act) only, considering the Notification has been brought in by the Ministry of Corporate Affairs.
Related parties for a Government Company
As per clause (76) of section 2 of the Act following shall be a related party with reference to a company:
- a director or his relative;
- a key managerial personnel or his relative;
- a firm, in which a director, manager or his relative is a partner;
- a private company in which a director or manager or his relative is a member or director;
- a public company in which a director or manager is a director and holds along with his relatives, more than two per cent of its paid-up share capital;
- any body corporate whose Board of Directors, managing director or manager is accustomed to act in accordance with the advice, directions or instructions of a director or manager;
- any person on whose advice, directions or instructions a director or manager is accustomed to act: Provided that nothing in sub-clauses (vi) and (vii) shall apply to the advice, directions or instructions given in a professional capacity;
- any body corporate which is—
- a holding, subsidiary or an associate company of such company;
- a subsidiary of a holding company to which it is also a subsidiary; or
- an investing company or the venturer of the company
- a director other than an independent director or key managerial personnel of the holding company or his relative as prescribed under Rules
Accordingly, to consider someone as related party, he/ she/ it shall have to strictly fall under any of the aforesaid sub-clauses. Seemingly, the Government of India or any State Government having controlling stake in the company does not get fit in any of the said clauses as the CG/ SG is neither considered as a person nor an entity/ body corporate. Accordingly, CG/ SG is not a related party to a Government Company as per the aforesaid definition.
Similarly, to consider another Government Company as a related party for a Government Company, the former shall also be required to fall under the definition. Accordingly, one will have to determine whether the former Government Company is a related party or not, based on its structure i.e. private company, public company, body corporate, and also based on its relationship with the subject Government company i.e. holding company, subsidiary company, associate company etc.
Position before and after 2020 Notification
Transaction between Government companies and CG / SG
The position with respect to transactions between the Government Company and the CG/ SG before and after the 2020 Notification remains same as CG/ SG, as discussed above, does not get covered under the purview of the definition of related party provided under the Act. Therefore, until and unless there is a related party on the other side, any transactions with any other party cannot be considered as RPT. Accordingly, where the transaction itself is not an RPT, exemption from the provisions pertaining to RPTs does not arise.
Transaction between two Government Companies
As discussed above, for considering another Government Company as related party one has to consider the status of such company. Accordingly, for a Government Company, the following Government Companies may be considered as related party:
- A Government Company which is a private company in which a director, manager or relative thereof of the first mentioned Government Company is a member or director;
- A Government Company which is a public company in which a director or manager of the first mentioned Government Company is a director and holds along with his relatives, more than two per cent. of its paid-up share capital;
- A Government Company which is either the holding company or subsidiary or associate company of the first mentioned Government Company;
- A Government Company which is a fellow subsidiary of the first mentioned Government Company;
- A Government Company to which first mentioned Government Company is an associate company
Considering the structure of the Government Companies, it is very unlikely to have related parties covered under point (a) and (b) above. Coming to the position before or after the 2020 Notification, there is no change, as the 2015 Notification already covered transactions between two Government Companies.
Transactions between the Government Companies and other related parties including non- Government Companies
From the definition provided in the Act, the following persons/ entities may also be considered as related parties for a Government Company:
- Individuals who are director, key managerial personnel (KMP), relatives of director/ KMP (s), a director other than an independent director or KMP of the holding company or his relative;
- Firm in which a director or manager or relative thereof is a partner;
- Non- Government Companies such as:
- Private companies in which a director or manager or relative thereof is member or director;
- Public companies in which a director or manager is a director and holds > 2% of its paid-up share capital, singly or jointly with his relatives;
- Body corporate whose Board/ managing director/ manager accustomed to act in accordance with the advice, directions or instructions of a director or manager;
- Any person on whose advice, directions or instructions a director or manager is accustomed to act.
While the parties mentioned in point (d) and (e) above, cannot be determined without analysing the proper facts and considering these are purely circumstantial in nature, it is very unlikely to have such related parties. As regards the position before and after the 2020 Notification, the transactions between these related parties will still require the prior approval of the administrative Ministry in charge, if the company is not obtaining prior shareholders’ approval. Accordingly, there is no change in the position after 2020 Notification.
While the 2020 Notification is an extended version of the 2015 Notification, however, it seems that it does not carry any relevance at all. The reason for the same is that CG/ SG, as discussed above, does not get covered under the purview of the definition of related party provided under the Act. Therefore, until and unless there is a related party on the other side, any transactions with any other party cannot be considered as RPT. Accordingly, where the transaction itself is not an RPT, exemption from the provisions pertaining to RPTs does not arise.
Our other articles on related party transactions:
Team Vinod Kothari & Company | email@example.com
Updated on 29th March, 2020
Like all other public agencies, MCA has been taking a series of steps in the wake of the rapidly spreading COVID-19 and issued clarification on spending of CSR funds for COVID 19 stating that the amount spent on COVID-19 by companies will count towards CSR spending. The activities falling under item nos. (i) & (xii) of Schedule VII of Companies Act, 2013 undertaken due to COVID 19 shall qualify as CSR activity which covers the following:
- Eradicating hunger, poverty and malnutrition, promoting health care including preventive health care and sanitation including contribution to the Swach Bharat Kosh set-up by the Central Government for the promotion of sanitation and making available safe drinking water.
- Disaster management, including relief, rehabilitation and reconstruction activities.
Subsequently, the Ministry on 28th March, 2020 has also clarified by way of an office memorandum, that companies contributing towards recently formed Prime Minister’s Citizen Assistance and Relief in Emergency Situations Fund (‘PM CARES Fund’) shall also qualify as CSR expenditure under item (viii) of Schedule VII of Companies Act, 2013.
Hence, this is the right occasion, and unarguably, one of the noblest causes, to use CSR funds in whatever way, one may think of for the welfare of society.
Notably, substantial CSR money remains unspent, very often for want of appropriate CSR projects. Many companies have to explain the same by finding some reason or the other. Currently the country is passing through an epidemic that has affected the whole world. Hence, companies may come forward and spend their unspent CSR budgets. Indeed companies are also welcome to over-spend this year’s budget pursuant to a proposal in the Companies Amendment Bill which permits carry forward of excess spending as well.
Questions are often being asked – can the company include the expenditure incurred for COVID-19 preparedness for its own employees and workmen – say, giving of masks, sanitizers, or similar expense, as a part of its CSR spending?
Our answer to this question is the same as what we have continuously answered as a part of our FAQs on CSR that CSR is spending on a social cause. An employer spending for the well being, safety or welfare of employees is performing the employer’s legal or moral obligation. That cannot be regarded as CSR. However, if the company spends on COVID-19 preparedness, either by itself or through implementing agencies, for a wider section of public, and its employees or their families are also the beneficiaries of such an exercise, there is no denial as to eligibility of the same as CSR spending.
Our detailed write ups on CSR may be viewed here:
Vinod Kothari and Company; firstname.lastname@example.org
Updated as on 23rd March, 2020
All companies and LLPs must have, by now, got mailers from the Ministry of Company Affairs about COVID-19 preparedness, and the need to file a web based form CAR 2020 i.e. Company Affirmation of Readiness towards COVID 19.
The MCA circular is nothing but a disaster management step from the Ministry, imploring upon all companies and LLPs to get sensitised to the need for handling this colossal challenge to humanity, India included. It will be an ironical travesty if the filing of the form is taken as a compliance requirement.
Therefore, in our view, what matters is the preparedness itself, not so much the task of having the so-called policy or the filing of the form itself.
However, the country has a few lakhs of companies, and the affirmation of preparedness by filing this form will be expected from all the companies. Hence, there is understandably a barrage of questions from clients and others.
We at Vinod Kothari & Company will be happy to contribute in our own little way; hence, if companies/LLPs have questions around this Form, we have thought it apt to put them down into this small guidance. We wish and pray that all of you stay safe during this challenging time.
1. Whether the Advisory has any statutory backing?
Let us not even think of this as emanating from some power under the law. Neither do we have to search for such a power, nor question it. As human beings, not every action of ours arises out of legal obligations. It is a simple step by the Ministry towards sensitisation of the corporate sector, towards fulfilling an urgent social and human obligation.
2. What are the steps being suggested through the Advisory?
Companies and LLPs are being advised to put in place an immediate plan to implement a ‘work from home’ policy as a temporary measure.
3. What is the object of having such a plan?
The object of having such a plan is to ensure social distancing as advised by WHO and other public health authorities in the recent outbreak of COVID-19 which is required for preventing the rapid spread and transmission of the disease at community level.
4. My company does not have any permanent employees. Am I still required to adhere to this policy?
If there are no permanent employees, it is all peace as far as your company is concerned. Go and file the form and say you have taken necessary steps.
5. Whether the companies and LLPs will have to frame a written ‘work from home’ policy?
The Advisory suggests to have a plan to implement the work from home policy for the employees. In our view, the same is not required to be a written or formal policy. The word “policy” here should mean the steps to be taken by the organisation to provide the facility of working from home to its employees and the manner/ procedure to be followed to ensure the same. If there is a policy, typically, the policy is applied to all employees covered by it without discrimination. Further, the process and manner to be followed shall be different from organisation to organisation. Accordingly, in case of companies, the decision may be taken at management level, while in case of others, by the head of the organisation.
6. What all does a work from home policy include?
As we said above, we are not envisaging this to be a formal document. However, please do consider the following:
- Who all can be permitted to work from home – for those who have to be present, whether there is rotational or staggered presence?
- What will be the weekly and daily working hours?
- Whether necessary equipment or software is in place for working from home?
- Whether there will be any revision in compensation and benefits paid to the employees?
- Whether employees have adequate internet connection required for the job?
- What level of dedication and concentration is expected from employees during working hours?
- What will be the method of marking attendance or absence?
- Who will review work of whom and how?
- Revision in employees code of conduct
- How to maintain and ensure confidentiality of information
- Installation of necessary software for group discussions or meetings
- To educate remote employees on basic security policies as for example use of VPN is a secure channel and better than public network
- Establishment of virtual employee allowance or reimbursements for expenses such as internet, phone, electricity and other utilities
- Strict adherence to do’s and don’ts issued by public health authorities from time to time
- Date of implementation of this policy- with immediate effect till 31st March, 2020 (tentative date, maybe extended depending upon the situation)
7. The circulars are being addressed to CEOs/directors. Is the action required to be taken at board/CEO level?
First of all, the actions expected are urgent – therefore, please do not wait for any formal processes or board resolutions. Whoever is in charge of putting administrative allocations may take such steps. Looking at the seriousness, it is expected that senior management is involved. However, it does not matter if there is any formal ratification or issue of circular, unless the organisation expects such formal internal documents.
8. Till what time the work from home policy to be adopted?
Till 31st March, 2020. The same shall be reviewed by the appropriate authorities based on the evolving situation.
9. What is the form CAR all about?
It is a web form deployed on 23rd March, 2020 by the Ministry. The same is a simple web based form requiring only an OTP based verification and does not require any digital signature for affirming or denying the adoption of work from home policy.
10. Is there a fee for filing form CAR?
There is no fee for filing the form. Seriously, we don’t even imagine there can be a fee.
11. Who will require to file the said form?
All companies and LLPs are expected to file the said form. There is no exclusion or exemption for OPCs, private companies or small companies. However, looking at the language of the applicability, partnership firms and proprietorship concerns have been kept outside the purview of filing CAR, 2020.
12. What is the timeline to file?
The web form CAR, 2020 is deployed on the MCA portal on 23rd March, 2020. Initially, the advice suggested to file it on the same day, however, later it was clarified that the same can be filed till 30th March, 2020.
13. What kind of information/ data to be reported?
As per the twitter handle of the Hon’ble Minister of Finance and Corporate Affairs the possible format of the form shall contain the following:
- CIN/ FCRN/ LLPIN/ FLLPIN
- Name of the company/ foreign company/ LLP/ Foreign LLP
- Whether the company/ LLP is in compliance of COVID 19 Guidelines?
- Authorised Signatory of the company/ LLP
- DIN/ PAN/ Membership No. of the Authorised Signatory
- Mobile No.
The step to step guide on filing CAR 2020 has been issued by MCA on 22nd March, 2020. The same can be viewed here.
14. Whether foreign company/ LLPs are also required to follow the Advisory?
The Advisory suggests all companies/ LLPs to file the form. The intent seems to include all the companies/ LLPs incorporated in India or companies/ LLPs not incorporated in India but having operations/ physical presence in India. The contents of the Form as provided in Query 9 above suggest the same.
15. What do the COVID 19 Guidelines mean?
There is no definition as such. However, it should mean the Advisory itself issued by the Govt. from time to time. One may refer to pages such as https://www.mygov.in/covid-19/?cbps=1.
16. Who is the Authorised Signatory of the company/ LLP for authenticating the form?
As referred to above, it seems that the authorised signatory may be a director, CS, CFO or any other person authorised to file the form. However, who is eligible to give such authority is not clear. In our view, in case of companies which have given general authority to the CS/ any director/ CFO to file necessary forms with the regulatory authorities from time to time, such authorised persons may file the form. In case of others, the same may be filed by the MD/ head of the organisation who looks after the day to day affairs or any person authorised by such MD/ head of the organisation. Once again, we suggest there need not be a formal flow of authorisation, such as a resolution, for filing the form.
17. Whether the mobile no. has to be a registered mobile no.?
Since the form is an OTP verified form, the OTP is sent on the mobile no of the person who is authenticating the form and the same is prefilled on providing details of the authorised person.
18. What are the consequences of non- filing?
There is no penalty for non-filing of the form. Further the Advisory is not coming from any statutory requirement but out of a social obligation only, non- filing of the same may not lead to any penal consequences.
19. The Authorised Signatory may be the compliance officer. But how does the compliance officer certify the preparedness across the company, with so many locations?
The authorised signatory is not taking the burden upon himself. The signatory may, in turn, get confirmations from those who are involved, say, the HR head or similar positions.
20. In view of the lockdown/ shutdowns announced by the state governments for various places in India, does it mean lockout of operations by the corporate houses and giving leaves altogether?
Please note that shutdown does not mean shutdown of operation. Therefore, it still means work from home. The whole intent of shutdown is to control movement and not to control work.
21. Are the companies mandatorily required to file form CAR?
As per the information uploaded on MCA’s website, the filing of the form is on voluntary basis. Therefore, the company/ LLP (s) may take a call on filing. However, if one throws a question on whether they are required to take steps to combat COVID-19 by following government guidelines, please note that we have no doubt on answering this is positive. Everyone including the companies and LLPs are mandatorily required to take steps during this health emergency.