Introduction
Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) in India underwent a paradigm shift with the enactment of the Companies Act, 2013, transforming CSR from a voluntary corporate activity into a statutory obligation. Prior to this legislative development, CSR activities were largely guided by corporate discretion and philanthropy, with no mandatory framework compelling companies to allocate resources for social welfare. The introduction of Section 135 of the Companies Act, 2013, along with Schedule VII, institutionalized CSR, making India the first country to legally mandate CSR spending. While this statutory framework ensures compliance, questions remain regarding whether CSR has generated meaningful socio-economic impact or remains primarily a regulatory exercise.
Scope and Applicability
Under Section 135, CSR obligations apply to companies with a net worth of ₹500 crore or more, turnover of ₹1,000 crore or more, or net profit of ₹5 crore or more in a financial year. Such companies are required to spend at least 2% of the average net profits of the preceding three years on CSR activities, which include education, healthcare, environmental sustainability, gender equality, rural development, and protection of national heritage. Companies must also constitute a CSR Committee of the Board, draft a CSR Policy, and disclose activities in their annual reports, integrating CSR into governance and transparency frameworks.
Compliance Framework
From a compliance perspective, the legal structure is rigorous. Companies must transfer unspent CSR funds related to ongoing projects to a special CSR account within three years. Failure to comply with CSR obligations can result in monetary penalties for the company and its officers, reinforcing CSR as a statutory requirement. The Companies (Amendment) Act, 2019 further clarified that unspent amounts for ongoing projects must be utilized in accordance with the approved CSR policy, thereby minimizing loopholes that could allow circumvention of statutory duties.
Compliance versus Impact
Despite a strong legal framework, empirical evidence suggests that many corporations treat CSR as a formal compliance exercise rather than a transformative strategy. Spending patterns indicate a preference for short-term donations, branding initiatives, or events with high visibility, while neglecting long-term sustainable development projects. Moreover, CSR initiatives often concentrate geographically near urban centers or corporate operational sites, leaving marginalized or remote communities underserved. This divergence between legal compliance and genuine social impact highlights the need to evaluate CSR not merely in terms of expenditure but in terms of measurable outcomes.
Judicial Perspectives
Judicial interpretations have further shaped CSR compliance norms. In Tech Mahindra Ltd. v. State of Maharashtra (2022 Bom HC), the Bombay High Court addressed the issue of whether CSR spending qualifies as deductible for tax purposes. The court emphasized that CSR expenditure is a legal obligation and not merely discretionary, clarifying that tax treatment must align with the legislative intent of CSR. This judgment reinforced the principle that CSR cannot be viewed as optional philanthropy but as a mandatory social responsibility, bridging the gap between corporate compliance and statutory interpretation.
Another important judicial perspective arises from the broader principle of mandatory penalties in statutory frameworks. In Securities and Exchange Board of India v. Shriram Mutual Fund (2006 SC), the Supreme Court held that penalties under statutory provisions must be enforced irrespective of corporate intent or voluntary compliance. Although predating CSR mandates, this ruling has been applied by regulators to reinforce the enforcement of CSR obligations under Section 135. It underscores that statutory CSR is not merely a moral or ethical exercise but a legally enforceable obligation, thereby discouraging token compliance.
Impactful CSR Practices
Beyond compliance, there are exemplary cases where CSR has generated tangible social impact. Corporations such as the Tata Group, Infosys Foundation, and ITC Ltd. have implemented long-term projects in education, healthcare, environmental sustainability, and livelihood generation. These initiatives demonstrate that when CSR is integrated into corporate strategy, it can contribute to sustainable development, positively affect communities, and enhance corporate reputation. Such examples affirm that statutory compliance can align with impactful social contribution when companies adopt a proactive and strategic approach.
Challenges in Implementation
Challenges remain in monitoring and evaluating CSR outcomes. The current framework emphasizes input-based reporting, such as the total amount spent, rather than output or outcome-based metrics, such as measurable improvements in literacy rates, healthcare access, or environmental conditions. The lack of standardized impact assessment mechanisms and third-party verification often reduces CSR to an accounting exercise. Addressing this gap requires robust evaluation frameworks, social audits, and stakeholder feedback mechanisms, ensuring that expenditure translates into real-world benefits.
Another concern is the outsourcing of CSR initiatives to NGOs or trusts, which, while expanding outreach, may dilute corporate accountability. Excessive delegation can result in limited corporate engagement, reducing CSR to a mechanism for compliance rather than a vehicle for responsible corporate citizenship. Companies are therefore encouraged to align CSR with core business competencies, integrate CSR objectives into corporate strategy, and maintain active oversight of project implementation.
Voluntary vs Mandatory CSR Debate
Critics have questioned whether mandatory CSR undermines the voluntary nature of corporate responsibility. While this concern is valid, it overlooks the rationale that corporations derive substantial benefits from societal resources and are therefore obliged to contribute systematically to social welfare. Mandatory CSR establishes a baseline of social accountability, which can stimulate innovation and strategic philanthropy beyond statutory minimums.
Conclusion
CSR under the Companies Act, 2013 represents a landmark legislative initiative, institutionalizing corporate responsibility and positioning India at the forefront of CSR legislation globally. While statutory requirements ensure compliance, meaningful social impact depends on strategic integration, effective monitoring, and corporate commitment. Judicial interpretations, such as Tech Mahindra Ltd. v. State of Maharashtra and the principles enunciated in Securities and Exchange Board of India v. Shriram Mutual Fund, reinforce that CSR is a legal obligation with enforceable consequences, bridging compliance and responsibility. Ultimately, CSR should evolve from a regulatory requirement to a transformative instrument for societal development, ensuring that corporate resources are mobilized not only to meet statutory mandates but also to foster inclusive growth, equitable opportunity, and sustainable development. The law provides the framework; the corporate ethos must ensure the impact.
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)
Q1: Which companies are required to comply with CSR under the Companies Act, 2013?
Q2: What is the minimum CSR spending mandated by law?
Q3: Can CSR funds be carried forward if unspent?
Q4: Are companies required to report their CSR activities?
Q5: Can CSR expenditure be treated as a tax-deductible expense?
Q6: Does mandatory CSR affect voluntary philanthropy?
Q7: What activities qualify under Schedule VII of the Companies Act, 2013 for CSR?
Q8: What is the role of the CSR Committee of the Board?
Q9: Are there penalties for non-compliance with CSR provisions?
Q10: How can companies ensure their CSR initiatives create actual social impact?
Also Read:
Rights of undertrial prisoners in India
How To Send A Legal Notice In India
