Lok Sabha Debates
Discussion On The Motion For Consideration Of The Companies (Amendment) Bill, ... on 19 September, 2020
Seventeenth Loksabha an> Title: Discussion on the motion for consideration of the Companies (Amendment) Bill, 2020 (Discussion concluded and Bill Passed).
माननीय अध्यक्ष : अब हम आइटम नम्बर 16, कंपनी (संशोधन)विधेयक, 2020 लेते हैं ।
माननीय मंत्री जी ।
THE MINISTER OF FINANCE AND MINISTER OF CORPORATE AFFAIRS (SHRIMATI NIRMALA SITHARAMAN): I beg to move:
“That the Bill further to amend the Companies Act, 2013, be taken into consideration.” माननीय अध्यक्ष : प्रस्ताव प्रस्तुत हुआ :
“कि कंपनी अधिनियम, 2013 का और संशोधन करने वाले विधेयक पर विचार किया जाए ।” …( व्यवधान)
माननीय अध्यक्ष : नो-नो ।
कई माननीय सदस्य : सर, इसे कल ले लीजिए ।…(व्यवधान)
माननीय अध्यक्ष : नहीं । श्री मनीश तिवारी जी ।
श्री मनीश तिवारी (आनंदपुर साहिब): अध्यक्ष जी, आपकी अनुमति से इस सदन में प्रस्तुत यह जो कंपनी (संशोधन) विधेयक, 2020 प्रस्तुत किया गया है, इसके ऊपर मैं अपनी बात रखने के लिए आज सदन के समक्ष हाज़िर हुआ । 20.50hrs (Shri N.K. Premachandran in the Chair ) यह जो विधेयक,कंपनीज के काम-काज को आसान बनाने के लिए लाया गया है, यह एक ऐसे परिप्रेक्ष्य में लाया गया है जब देश की आर्थिक परिस्थिति बहुत ही संवेदनशील और दुर्गम है । कोविड-19की महामारी से पहले, लॉकडाउन से पहले सात क्वार्टर्स तक भारत की जी.डी.पी. की जो वृद्धि दर है, वह निरंतर और लगातार हर क्वार्टर में गिरती रही । जब कोविड की महामारी का प्रकोप शुरू हुआ, उसके बाद जब इस वित्तीय वर्ष के पहले क्वार्टर के नतीजे आए, उसमें अर्थव्यवस्था की जो वृद्धि दर है, वह माइनस 23.9 प्रतिशत हुआ । कुल मिलाकर,जब से इस सरकार ने नोटबंदी की और उसके बाद जिस प्रकार से जी.एस.टी. को लागू किया गया, उस समय से निरंतर और लगातार इस देश की अर्थव्यवस्था बद से बदतर होती गई । देश की अर्थव्यवस्था बैठती गई । आज जब यह विधेयक लाया गया है तो मुल्क के सामने यह परिस्थिति है कि डिमांड के नाम के ऊपर देश की अर्थव्यवस्था में एक बहुत बड़ी कमी है, एक बहुत बड़ी खामी है । जो गलती सरकार ने वर्ष 2019 में की थी कि जब डिमांड स्टीमुलस देने की जरूरत थी, इन्होंने 1,45,000 करोड़ रुपये देकर कॉरपोरेट टैक्स में कंपनीज़ को जो रिलीफ दिया,उसका इंजेक्शन लगाकर देश की अर्थव्यवस्था को बढ़ाने की कोशिश की, वह पूरी तरह से विफल हो गई । आज वही गलती यह सरकार दोबारा दुहरा रही है । इस देश का जो गरीब आदमी है, जो शोषित है, जो वंचित है, जिसके ऊपर कोविड महामारी की सबसे ज्यादा मार पड़ी है, उसकी तरफ ध्यान देने की जगह जो सूट-बूट वाले हैं, जो कॉरपोरेट वाले हैं, उन्हें फिर दोबारा से रियायतें दी जा रही हैं । उनकी जिन्दगी को आसान बनाने की कोशिश की जा रही है । यह दर्शाता है कि इस सरकार की जो प्राथमिकताएं हैं, वे इस देश के आम नागरिक के साथ नहीं हैं,आखिरी कतार में खड़े हुए आखिरी नागरिक के साथ नहीं हैं । पर,जो पूंजीपति है, जो सूट-बूट वाला है,यह सरकार सिर्फ उसकी ईज़-ऑफ-लिविंग की कदर करती है, उसकी जो सहूलियतें हैं,उनके ऊपर यह विशेष ध्यान देती है ।
आज जो कानून लाया गया है, इसका तो इतिहास है,वह मैं आपके सामने रखना चाहता हूं । वर्ष 1913 में सबसे पहली कोशिश की गई कि जो कंपनी का कानून है, उसको कोडिफाइ किया जाए, उसको अमली जामा पहनाया जाए । वर्ष 1913 में अँग्रेजी साम्राज्यवाद भारत में भारी था । 200 साल हो चुके थे, जब से ईस्ट इंडिया कम्पनी भारत आई थी और उन साम्राज्यवादियों ने वर्ष 1913 में पहला कम्पनीज़ एक्ट बनाया, जो रेट्रोस्पेक्टिव्ली 1 अप्रैल, 1911 से लागू हुआ ।
यह 137 सेक्शंस का एक्ट था । उसके बाद हालात बदले, भारत आजाद हुआ और वर्ष 1956 में उस कानून को रिपील करके एक नया कानून लाया गया । उसमें 658 अंक शामिल किए गए । वर्ष 1956 से लेकर वर्ष 2013 तक 25 बार उस कानून को संशोधित किया गया । वर्ष 1991 में भारत की उदारीकरण के बाद देश ने यह तय किया कि अपनी इकोनॉमी को ग्लोबलाइज करेगा । आज जो अर्थव्यवस्था है, जो आर्थिक परिस्थितियाँ हैं, वे बदली हैं । यह पाया गया कि वर्ष 1956 का जो कानून है, उसमें संशोधन करने की जरुरत है । वर्ष 1991 में जस्टिस राजेन्द्र सच्चर की समिति बनी और उसके बाद आर.डी.जोशी की समिति बनी । उनकी सिफारिशों के बाद बहुत सोच-समझ कर वर्ष 2013 में एक नए कंपनीज़ एक्ट को इस संसद ने अनुमति दी । आज फिर हमको यह कहा जा रहा है कि इस कानून को संशोधित करने की जरुरत है ।
सभापति महोदय, विडंबना यह है कि वर्ष 2013 में उस कानून को लाया गया, वर्ष 2014 में वह सरकार बदली,एक नई सरकार आई और वर्ष 2014 से लेकर वर्ष 2020 तक इस कानून में 150 संशोधन अभी तक हो चुके हैं । इन सात सालों में इसके अंतर्गत सरकार की तरफ से जो क्लैरिफिकेशंस,सर्कुलर्स और ऑडर्स हैं, वे शामिल नहीं हैं । इसका सीधा-सीधा तात्पर्य यह है कि कानून को जो एक सैक्रोसेंक्ट देने की जरुरत होती है, वह न देते हुए अपनी सुविधा के अनुसार उस कानून को बदलने की कोशिश करती है । आज फिर इस संसद के सामने यह संशोधन विधेयक लाया गया है और उसका जो औचित्य है, वह औचित्य यह है कि एक कंपनी लॉ कमेटी सितंबर 2018 में बनाई गई और दो महीनों में उसने ऐसी क्राँतिकारी सिफारिशें कर दीं कि जो कानून का पूरा स्वरुप है,जो वर्ष 1991 से लेकर वर्ष 2013 तक अलग-अलग समितियों की सिफारिशों के ऊपर लोगों से राय-मशविरा करके स्थायी समिति की सिफारिशों को संज्ञान में लेकर जो कानून बनाया गया था, उसको पूरी तरह से परिवर्तित करने का आज मसौदा इस संसद के सामने लाया गया है । The first thing that this Amendment Bill seeks to achieve is to reduce the rigours which are attached to maleficence insofar as the Companies Act, 2013 is concerned.
Hon. Chairperson, Sir, it was after great deliberations that a very fine balance between coercive action and civil action was struck in the Companies Act of 2013. After all, time has demonstrated and all of us are aware that companies are not paragons of virtue. उनके कुछ सुर्खाब पेपर नहीं रखे हुए हैं । इस देश में खासकर पिछले छह साल में जितने तथाकथित घोटाले हुए हैं,जितने व्यवसायी भागकर बाहर गए हैं, शायद उसकी गिनती करना भी मुश्किल है ।
21.00 hrs यह कानून क्या करता है? यह कानून कंपनीज़ को जितनी फौजदारी के रिगर्स थे या जो क्रिमिनल लॉ के रिगर्स थे या अगर वे गलत काम करते हैं तो फौजदारी के कानून के तहत उनको जो यातनाएं दी जा सकती थीं,यह लगभग सभी को खत्म कर देता है । इस कानून का सबसे बड़ा उद्देश्य यह है कि किस तरह से लोग गलती करते हैं, उनको फौजदारी के कानून के तहत सजा देने की जगह उसको सिविल आफेंस में कैसे परिवर्तित किया जाए? उसका रैशनल क्या दिया जाता है? आप इस बिल का स्टेटमेंट ऑफ ऑब्जेक्ट्स एंड रीजंस पढ़िए । इसमें जो चौथा पैराग्राफ है,उसमें लिखा है:
“4. The Companies (Amendment) Bill, 2020, inter alia, provides for the following, namely:— (a) to decriminalise certain offences under the Act in case of defaults which can be determined objectively and which otherwise lack any element of fraud or do not involve larger public interest; ” My question is that who is going to be the arbiter of this public interest. Who is going to determine what is in public interest and what is in private interest? What are those principles which are going to be applied in order to carry out that determination that this offence is a private interest offence and another offence is a public interest offence? With great respect, Mr. Chairman, Sir, I think, this is an extremely insidious classification which is being made and which will fall foul of any constitutional challenge which is mounted against this Bill.
The second object which this amendment Bill seeks to achieve is कि वर्ष 1956 के कानून में प्रोड्यूसर कंपनीज़ के बारे में एक अलग चैप्टर का प्रावधान था । वर्ष 2013 के कानून में वह प्रोड्यूसर कंपनीज़ का चैप्टर शामिल नहीं किया गया । यह कहा गया कि जो वर्ष 1956 के कानून में लिखा है, वही वर्ष 2013 के कानून में भी लागू होगा ।
इस संशोधन विधेयक में एक नया चैप्टर 21 (ए) जोड़ा गया है, जो प्रोड्यूसर कंपनी से संबंधित है । अगर आप इस संशोधन को, जो 2 दिन पहले विधेयक लाए गए थे, कृषि के संबंध में,कांट्रैक्ट फार्मिंग के संबंध में, ट्रेडिंग प्लेटफार्म्स के संबंध में,एपीएमसी का जो दायरा है उसके दायरे के बाहर खरीद-फरोख्त के संबंध में,अगर आप उससे जोड़कर देखिए,तो यह बहुत साफ हो जाता है कि यह एक रास्ता बनाया जा रहा है जिससे कि कंपनियां और बड़े-बड़े घराने,बड़े-बड़े व्यवसायी किस तरह से कृषि के मार्केट में,कृषि के व्यवसाय में घुस सकते हैं । This entire provision with regard to producer companies when read in juxtaposition with the earlier Bills which pertain to contract farming as well as pertain to alternate feeding mechanisms, and to provide platforms for trading outside the APMC areas and when all of this is taken together, this is nothing but a backdoor to facilitate the entry of big corporates into the agricultural sector which is going to militate against the interest of the small and the marginal farmers. Over a period of time, it will have the impact of unravelling the first 15 amendments to the Indian Constitution from 1950 to 1965 which were carried in order to give land to the landless, in order to abolish the zamindari system, in order to ensure that the farmer who produces food for this country has both dignity of labour and permanency over his land.
Hon. Chairperson, Sir, I have two more points to make. Since these are important amendments, allow me to make those two points.
The penultimate point is with regard to relaxation of CSR guidelines. This Bill provides that your CSR commitments can be rolled over for a period of three years. अगर आपने इस साल ज्यादा पैसा खर्च कर दिया है तो आप उसके अगले साल इसका फायदा ले सकते हैं । मैं बहुत संवेदनशीलता से यह बात कहना चाहता हूं कि इस देश में कॉरपोरेट सोशल रिस्पॉन्सबिलिटी क्या है, अभी तक व्यवसायी जगत उसको पूरी तरह से समझ नहीं पाया है ।
It is extremely difficult to get companies to implement or to enforce their Corporate Social Responsibility, and to give this kind of flexibility in the Corporate Social Responsibility regime even before the law of the land has completely settled down, I think, is completely erroneous. कंपनी को एक रास्ता दिया जा रहा है कि अपने कॉरपोरेट सोशल रिस्पॉन्सबिलिटी से कैसे भाग सकें और जिनका कॉरपोरेट सोशल रिस्पॉन्सबिलिटी कॉरपस पचास लाख से कम है, उनको इसकी अनुमति भी दी जा रही है कि आपको अपने कंपनी में कॉरपोरेट सोशल रिस्पानसबिलिटी समिति बनाने की भी कोई जरूरत नहीं है । मैं बहुत सहकार के साथ यह बात कहना चाहता हूं, इनकी मंशा है कि जो पहल 2013 के कानून में की गई थी, जो व्यवसायी कंपनियां हैं,उनकी समाज के प्रति भी जिम्मेदारी बनती है । उसको पूरी तरह से शिथिल करने की कोशिश इस सशोधन की वजह से हो रही है ।
मैं आखिरी बात कहना चाहता हूं कि एनबीएफसी और हाउसिंग फाइनेंस कंपनी को इस संशोधन में बहुत राहत दी जा रही है । आप सभी को मालूम है । आईएल एंड एफएस घोटाले की जांच अभी भी चल रही है । दीवान हाउसिंग फाइनेंस में जो हुआ है, उसका भुगतान अभी भी लोग कर रहे हैं । जब समय था कि एनबीएफसी और हाउसिंग फाइनेंस कंपनीज के ऊपर सरकार को लगाम कसनी चाहिए थी,उस समय सरकार लगाम ढीली करके उनको छूट दे रही है । जिस तरह से वे कार्य करते आए हैं, इससे अर्थव्यवस्था का नुकसान होता है, वह नुकसान होता रहेगा ।
Sir, I will just conclude by saying that in the past six years this Government, through a regime of persecution, has created a climate of fear which has completely and absolutely derailed economic activity in this country. Now when the wheels of the economy have stopped turning, they are trying to self-correct and in the process of self-correcting they are going completely over-board and they are completely going over to the other side whereby they are introducing a kind of Laissez Faire in the economy whereby it will be a free for all for the corporates to do what they like without any regulatory oversight of the Government.
Sir, with these words, I would like to strongly oppose the amendments to the Companies Act of 2013 and also would like to thank you for your indulgence.
SHRIMATI APARAJITA SARANGI (BHUBANESWAR): Hon. Chairperson Sir, I consider it my privilege to be able to speak on the Companies (Amendment) Bill, 2020. I am immensely grateful to you for giving me this opportunity.
At the outset let me offer my compliments to the hon. Prime Minister, Shri Narendra Modi and the Finance Ministry for taking this bold and much needed step to amend the Companies Act, 2013. With this amendment, the Central Government has proved that it is not only responsive to the changing requirements of the business community in the country, but also it is capable of taking timely and effective decision in this time of crisis.
This amendment will promote and encourage ethical business practice in the country and reinforce the belief of common and economic value creation. Sir, this amendment will result in ease of doing honest business and ease of doing ethical business.
Now, let me go back to the sequence of events. I just want to apprise the House about the sequence of events leading to the placement of this Bill today in this august House.
As all of us know, the Companies Act, 2013 was enacted on 29th August, 2013 to consolidate and amend the law relating to companies. The earlier Companies Act of 1956 had been repealed and, as told by my learned colleague in the Opposition, there were different amendments at different points of time. There were amendments in 2015, 2017 and 2019 but these amendments took place because these amendments had to address the difficulties arising out of the operation of the Act.
The Government sees that there are operational problems when a particular Act is being implemented. We should remember that it is an Act of 2013. There were operational issues and that is why, amendments had to be brought in and that is why, amendments are being brought in today when I am speaking to you.
Sir, let me now tell you the entire sequence of events as I mentioned earlier. The Government led by hon. Prime Minister, Shri Modi, has been constantly endeavouring - and it is all written on the wall and everybody is aware of it – to facilitate greater ease of living for all including the law-abiding corporates. I underscore ‘for all including the law-abiding corporates’.
The Government constituted the Company Law Committee on 18th September, 2019 under the Chairmanship of the then Secretary, Corporate Affairs. The best part is that, in that particular Committee, there were eminent people from different segments and sectors. There were people from industry chambers, professional institutes and legal fraternity.
This particular Committee has been constituted to actually decriminalise penal provisions of Companies Act, 2013 based on their gravity and take other concomitant measures to provide further ease of living for law-abiding corporates in the country. This is the basic aim of this amendment. This Committee submitted its Report after due deliberation on 18th November, 2019 before the Government.
Now the Department of Corporate Affairs actually submitted a note before the Union Cabinet on 10th December, 2019. I am harping on the sequence of events to say, to emphasise and to dwell on the fact that Government has duly considered all the steps and it has actually gone for stakeholder consultations. The Government has gone for all kinds of thinking through exercises and then it has come up with the proposal for amendment.
Interestingly, when it was sent to the Union Cabinet, there were two Groups of Minsters’ meetings. It was not cleared by the Cabinet just at one go without much consideration. The Union Cabinet desired two GoMs. So, there were two Groups of Ministers meetings and these two meetings actually went into each of the provisions that have been recommended for amendment. The Union Cabinet considered and approved the proposal to introduce the Companies Amendment Bill on 4th March, 2020. As per the decision of the Union Cabinet, today, the Bill prepares to carry out amendments to 72 Sections of the Companies Act, 2013 and the Bill was brought in this Lok Sabha by the hon. Finance Minister on 17th March, 2020. I reiterate that the sequence of events indicates that there has been considerable deliberation, thinking through and stakeholder consultations before the amendments have been brought today before the House.
Now Sir, the question is, what the key changes are that are being proposed in this particular Bill, and what would be the benefits that would be accruing if these amendments are actually implemented on the ground. I would be categorising all the amendments that have been suggested, that have been proposed under seven different heads. Please give me some time as I am the first speaker from my Party. I would be just elaborating on some of the key changes and the benefits thereof. It is very important for this august House to appreciate and understand the kind of benefits that would be coming to us.
First, it empowers the Central Government to exclude certain companies from the definition of listed companies. This is Section 2 of the Bill, amending Section 2 of the Act. I am referring to the Section of the Act of 2013 that would be amended. Now what is the present scenario? What would be the benefit if this would be amended?
Sir, Section 2(52) of the Companies Act 2013 defines the listed company as any company which has any of its securities listed on any recognised Stock Exchange. Section 42 of the present Act, read with Securities and Exchange Board of India's regulations, indicates that in addition to public companies, certain private companies too, are permitted to list debt securities on a recognised stock exchange. By virtue of being a listed company, the private companies too are required to comply with stringent regulations, and the compliance requirements mentioned in the Act. These stringent compliance requirements disincentivize the companies from seeking listing of their debt securities. बहुत सारी ऐसी कंपनियां थीं,जो हतोत्साहित हो रही थीं । इसलिए यह जरूरी था कि इन सभी को अनलिस्ट किया जाए, डीलिस्ट किया जाए ।
Now what is the proposal? This Amendment Bill chooses to exclude or delist certain class of companies from the status of listed companies, and to delist it in consultation with SEBI. Hard work has been put in while drafting this proposal. By virtue of this amendment, the disincentivizing provisions of the Act applicable to other listed companies under the Act can be made inapplicable to such private listed companies. This is the first key change, and this is what we are going to do once this amendment is accepted by this august House.
The second key change is this. It proposes enabling of listing in foreign jurisdiction. A tremendous benefit would accrue if this is done. This is Section 5 of the Bill amending Section 23 of the Act. Now what is the present scenario? The Act of 2013 does not allow the domestic companies to list their securities in Stock Exchanges in foreign jurisdiction. Neither the companies in foreign jurisdiction can do the same in India. So, Sir, what is the amendment proposed? The Bill empowers the Central Government to allow certain classes of public companies to list permitted securities in stock exchanges and permissible foreign jurisdiction. Permitting the direct listing of debt securities in foreign jurisdiction will help the domestic public companies by offering them a chance to access a larger pool of capital. This is likely to help our start-ups tap overseas market to raise capital. Start-ups are often on the lookout, as we know, Sir, to raise capital, and this would permit them to do so without migrating to a foreign jurisdiction.
Now the third and the most important proposal is the key change that we have been talking of and that I heard my dear friend talking about, that is, decriminalization of offences. This Amendment Bill introduces reforms in decriminalizing offences based on their gravity. I will be listing out four changes that have been proposed for the knowledge of the House.
One, 23 compoundable offences are referred to the In-house Adjudicating Mechanism, that is, IAM. Two, it proposes to omit seven offences which may be dealt with using other laws in force. Three, it proposes alternate framework for five offences. Four, a list of compoundable offences is restricted only to fine.
Sir, the benefit thereof would be that this Amendment Bill proposes to allow the company to pay the penalty, rectify their faults, and become compliant with the law through IAM Framework. This will promote ease of doing business. In fact, this is what the fear is all about. Why are we decriminalising? People will be going scot free; corporates will be going scot free. That is what has been raised. I was just listening to my dear friend. This will promote ease of doing business, this will boost the confidence of investors.
Here, I would just like to deviate from what I am saying. I will come to the fourth point. But before that, let me tell you that the World Bank’s Doing Business Report has come. India is now at 63rd rank; India was at 142nd rank; India has come up to 63rd rank; and this particular result has been due to all kinds of efforts that had been put in by the Central Government under the dynamic leadership of our hon. Prime Minister Modi. We have come from 142nd rank to 63rd rank. Now, the point is, by bringing these amendments and implementing them, definitely our position will improve.
Sir, we are moving from good to better and better to best. As we say, ‘Good, better, best; Never let it rest till your good is better and your better is best.’ HON. CHAIRPERSON: It is a good concluding sentence.
SHRIMATI APARAJITA SARANGI : Just for Prime Minister Modi we are better, but we have to be the best place. I am sure we will be able to do that and that is why it is very important to have this particular Bill implemented on the ground.
Sir, I will just take two-three minutes more. I am just putting forward the important issues that, I think, the House needs to know.
The fourth is the Corporate Social Responsibility. The Bill permits a company which spends in excess of the mandated two per cent to carry forward the excess spending towards their obligation for the next year. We have already discussed this. This is beneficial in case of CSR initiatives which require higher amount of capital as this allows the company to invest in CSR initiatives and have the excess being waived of from the CSR obligation arising in the subsequent year. इससे सीएसआर इनिशिएटिव को बल मिलेगा और कंपनियों का उत्साह बढ़ेगा,इसलिए यह करना जरूरी है ।
Sir, with introduction of a new Chapter on Producer Companies, and insertion of Chapter 21A to the Act of 2013, it will benefit the independent directors and this is, in fact, to encourage them. They will be given awards and they will be brought at par with the executive directors because they have contributed to the betterment of the company and they should be encouraged.
HON. CHAIRPERSON: Do not go into the details. Please conclude.
SHRIMATI APARAJITA SARANGI : Sir, please give me two minutes.
HON. CHAIRPERSON: Please come to the concluding part now.
SHRIMATI APARAJITA SARANGI : Exactly Sir.
This is the seventh key change that I was referring to. I talked of seven key changes. Benches of National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) will be set up in order to ease their burden and reduce the pendency of cases.
HON. CHAIRPERSON: It is very difficult to go into all the provisions of the Bill. Please conclude. Your former sentence was a very good sentence for conclusion.
SHRIMATI APARAJITA SARANGI : These are the concluding lines.
Sir, in periods like this when India is struggling to deal with a pandemic of such magnitude, boldness in policy making and debt financial management is the key to recovery. With all the conviction at my command and with all humility too, I can say that this amendment would encourage business, investment and entrepreneurship in the country. So, I humbly make an appeal to all my colleagues to support this Bill.
PROF. SOUGATA RAY (DUM DUM): Mr. Chairman, Sir, we heard two long speeches by Shri Manish Tewari and Shrimati Aparajita Sarangi.
HON. CHAIRPERSON : Saugata Rayji, let us be brief because the time is running out. It is Covid time and so, sitting late night is not good.
PROF. SOUGATA RAY : You are a marathon man and even you are getting tired.
HON. CHAIRPERSON: No; I am not getting tired. You are an elderly person and so, sitting very late is not good.
PROF. SOUGATA RAY : I will be brief.
All I want to say is that we are meeting in difficult times when the economy has gone into a tailspin. I was just reading the figures; growth is down by 23.9 per cent; Mrs. Sarangi is saying that we would get better.
Fiscal deficit has touched seven per cent of GDP. There is a 30.5 per cent fall in revenue in April-June. There is a 34 per cent fall in revenue from GST. There is a 13.1 per cent rise in expenditure. The economy is in a mess.
Now, when a person has cancer, you give him a placebo/palliative. This Companies Law, in these COVID times, is a placebo; it is a palliative. It is not going to change anything basically.
Both Mr. Tewari and Mrs. Sarangi have described the history behind the Bill. I was here in 2013 when the new Bill was passed. I spoke on the Bill at that time. But in retrospect, I do feel that the Bill was somewhat harsh. It introduced a very good concept of Corporate Social Responsibility for which UPA-II should be given the credit. Otherwise, that Bill came on the back of the ‘Satyam’ scam and other scams in the country. So, it became a little harsh.
In the Companies Law, one has to strike a balance between ‘strictness’ and ‘ease of doing business’. I think that this Bill has made some important changes in which they have decriminalised more than half of the existing compoundable offences under the Companies Law. It has also lowered the monetary penalties for violation by Start-ups amid efforts to further improve the ease of doing business in the country. I think, basically, we cannot quarrel with that.
I also say that a new Chapter on ‘Producer Companies’ has been introduced, and it seeks to decriminalise minor, procedural and technical defaults, which do not involve fraud or injury to the public interest. This will reduce the burden on the NCLT. The NCLT is already burdened with the cases under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC). So, it is a good idea.
Lastly, under the Bill, companies having CSR obligations of less than Rs. 50 lakh will not be required to form a CSR Committee. The Bill also proposes to lower the monetary penalties for violation by Start-ups, thus, trying to encourage them. But as I said, the future of economy in the country will not depend on companies. They need a law. So, Parliament has given them a law. They must discipline themselves so that there are no more scams, so that shareholders are not defrauded like it happened in the ‘Satyam’ case.
Sir, though I have given amendments, I shall not move them. Let this Bill be passed. If it gives some relief to some people, then that will be good.
With these words, I conclude.
SHRI SRIDHAR KOTAGIRI (ELURU): Sir, it is an honour for me to speak for my party YSR(CP) on the Companies (Amendment) Bill, 2020.
This Bill is bringing reforms to minimise penalties for the act of omission without an intent to cheat. We welcome this Bill.
While I would recommend a more lenient approach to smaller companies, which I think, is a large portion in our country, I, on behalf of YSR (CP) support the Companies (Amendment) Bill, 2020 as a means of improving governance. But I would like to take this opportunity to bring to light the difficulties our State is facing in this economic crisis and also the misdeeds and the reckless fiscal policy practised by the previous Government.
Here, I would like to bring to light a few examples, especially, in the presence of our hon. MoS, Finance. As we took over the Government in 2019 under the leadership of our young Chief Minister, Jagan Mohan Reddy-garu, the first thing that came to light was that the previous Government towards the end of their term, even in the last few days, borrowed and spent over Rs. 30,000 crore for electoral gains, and left a total amount of Rs. 60,000 crore as unpaid bills.
Not only that, I have read, in the last two days, about the Tata Constructions bid for our new upcoming Parliament for Rs. 800 crore, which is a permanent structure, and I bet and I am sure that it will be one of the best in the world with the capacity of, at least, a thousand MPs for the Lower House. Looking back – we had a discussion on that, I would like the House to be aware of this – in 2014, after bifurcation, under the then Chief Minister, an amount of Rs. 800 crore was spent to build a temporary structure for 175 State Legislators. This is a total fiscal indiscipline and it went totally unchecked. There is no accountability till date. I am just bringing a few points which are very glaring and easily understood by everybody.
Not only that, our Chief Minister spent just about Rs. 200 crore and he brought back to life 1,100 ambulances, the famous 108 and 104, which was started by our great Chief Minister Dr. Rajasekhara Reddy garu. The same amount or almost Rs. 250 crore was spent by the previous Chief Minister in taking people to the Polavaram Project just to make an impression that he was doing something again for electoral gains. The ambulances, which could have been bought at the same price, were defunct for the last five years of the previous Government rule.
Not only that, the then Ruling Party made a grand plan and got into an agreement dealing with 4,000 acres in the so-called Capital city of Amaravati. They declared it as a Capital. They had distributed 4,000 acres of land amongst their friends, family, kith and kin. We have, recently, realised that even the top officials, the then … (Not recorded), are involved. Their plan was to get a simple 2,000 yards per acre or Rs. 10 crore per acre, that means, about Rs. 40,000 crore. Till date, we are trying to impress upon the Central Government to kindly hold a CBI inquiry and bring to accountability all the misdeeds that happened.
As far as our Government is concerned, we are doing our best. We made a promise to bring governance to the doorstep of the common man and we have done exactly that in the last year and a half.
HON. CHAIRPERSON : Sridhar ji, if you are speaking on the Bill, it will be okay but this is absolutely nothing.
SHRI SRIDHAR KOTAGIRI: Sir, this is an opportunity we have. We, definitely, support the Bill. Just give me two minutes, I will finish.
We have built village secretariats. We have built agricultural support centres in every village. We have built health centres in every village. We have appointed three lakh volunteers to take care of 40 families per volunteer. They have listed out eligible candidates for every Government scheme. We do not see politics. We do not see caste.
HON. CHAIRPERSON: Shri Arvind Sawant ji.
SHRI SRIDHAR KOTAGIRI: We have, even, made eligible poor sections of the forward class for every scheme that is available.
HON. CHAIRPERSON: Sridhar ji, please sit down.
… (Interruptions)
SHRI ARVIND SAWANT (MUMBAI SOUTH): Thank you, Chairman, Sir. I would like to express my views on the Companies (Amendment) Bill, 2020.…(Interruptions)
HON. CHAIRPERSON: One second Arvind ji. Sridhar ji, please conclude your speech with one sentence.
SHRI SRIDHAR KOTAGIRI : Yes, Sir. We have been supporting the BJP Government on every Bill so far in Parliament. All we are saying is, we have about Rs. 15,000 crore, which is an accepted amount by the Central Government that is due to Andhra Pradesh under various heads. We request you all, once again, under these difficult times, to help us function and to deliver good governance to our people. Kindly make good your promise on the payment as soon as possible. As far as the Bill is concerned, on behalf of my Party, I support the Bill.
SHRI ARVIND SAWANT (MUMBAI SOUTH): Thank you, Chairman, Sir. I would like to express my views on the Companies (Amendment) Bill, 2020.
The total amendments which are being taking place in this Bill, sometimes, you feel, they are in favour of the businessmen. They need the support. We are expecting everybody to be honest. We have experienced some dishonest people also in the past.
I had the privilege to raise the issue in the Parliament regarding the Pancard company. You must be remembering as to how many people have been deceived by it. When you say it should be decriminalized, I feel an apprehension in my mind whether people would get justice. If the company owners have a feeling that nobody is going to punish them, they will decriminalize it, the penalty is also very minor, they will pay the money and they will carry out the business in this manner. I do not feel that any guarantee is there in this Amendment Bill right now. I do agree that businessmen, particularly in the pandemic, have suffered a lot. They need the support of all these things.
Anurag ji, particularly regarding start-ups and stand-ups, I would like to ask you or request you one thing. What is the number of startups? How much money we have spent on them or from MUDRA? What is the result of it? How many of them have done it successfully? How many have become unsuccessful? To them, you want to give an opportunity. We do agree that we must give them an opportunity to them because the youngsters are there. They want to stand up in the business and accordingly we should give them an opportunity.
The Bill seeks to substitute section 446B of the Act to provide for payment of lesser monetary penalty by a start-up company, Producer Company, One Person Company or a small company on failure to comply with the provisions of the Act which attract monetary penalties. The view or the aim of this Government must be a good one that once it has paid, okay, let us give support. But still, you are going to decriminalize the major penalties. That is a little bit apprehensive. He has quoted names of some companies like Dewan Housing and other companies. The issues are pending for years together. Common people, who are serving somewhere, have invested their money in the Pancard company. Still SEBI could not give them justice till date. You wound not believe that they are still the sufferers. They are not getting the money back. Therefore, by amending this Bill, how are you going to deliver justice to the investors who have invested their money in Pancard and other companies?
Here again, for technical lapses, based on the recommendations of the CLC and internal review by the Government, it is proposed to amend various provisions of the Act to decriminalise minor procedural or technical lapses under the provisions of the said Act. It is accepted; there is no doubt about it. But who will decide it whether it is minor or not? I would like to know whether NCLT or some other company will decide. NCLT will be there. The hon. Member who just spoke was saying that Adjudicating Committee will be there. That will look after these issues. On that, the answer has to be given by the Government.
The Amending Bill provides to empower the Central Government to exclude, in consultation with the Securities and Exchange Board, certain class of companies from the definition of “listed company”, mainly for listing of debt securities. What do you feel about it? You are an expert in law. How are you going to protect the people? Who are these? How will you decide? This Government will decide. Which are these companies? Certain class of companies are going to come out from the definition of “listed company”. What are the criteria to come out from the definition of “listed company”?
The amending Bill also provides to clarify the jurisdiction of trial court on the basis of place of commission of offence under section 452 of the Act for wrongful withholding of property of a company by its officers or employees, as the case may be. There again, your business is something else. You are holding properties somewhere else like the bankers which has happened in the case of the Yes Bank or the PMC bank. The Directors have purchased their properties somewhere else. Nobody knows about it. So many companies are coming into the picture. You would not believe it. I would quote a small example. In Mumbai, one person named Sheregar introduced a company and said that, see, Mr. Premachandran, hon. Chairperson, kindly invest your money and we will double the amount within three months or within six months. You would not believe that learned people invested the money. Then, they were deceived by the company. Are you going to decriminalise such persons? This is what is happening. Therefore, my request to the Government is this. The intention of the Government may be a good one to relax provisions relating to charging of higher additional fees.
HON. CHAIRPERSON : Please conclude.
SHRI ARVIND SAWANT : Sir, I will just conclude within a minute.
Charging of higher additional fees is there. What are you going to do for that? You are relaxing it for default on two or more occasions in submitting, filing, registering or recording of such document, fact or information, as may be prescribed, in Section 403. Once it is okay, twice also it is accepted. Two or more occasions is there. What is that ‘more’ occasions? What is that number? How many times you are going to forgive them? Number has to be specific. You should mention it. One or two or three occasions, that is all. Not more than that. If you say more occasions, he will keep on doing it. How are you going to control it? Therefore, while supporting or not supporting the Bill, the intentions are good but then take care of these things. I say take care. It should not become boomerang on the Government. That is what, I would like to express here. Thank you, Sir.
श्री मलूक नागर (बिजनौर): सभापति साहब,बहुत-बहुत धन्यवाद । जब हम देखते हैं तो पहली बार पढ़ने में लगता है कि गरीब, मजदूर और कमज़ोर लोगों के खिलाफ काम कर दिया और देश के पूंजीपति और कॉर्पोरेट सैक्टर के फेवर में काम कर दिया, लेकिन जब देखते हैं आज के माहौल को, जब देखते हैं कोरोना महामारी के बाद आर्थिक मंदी, जब देखते हैं पूरे वर्ल्ड को, तब लगता है कि प्रधान मंत्री जी बहुत अच्छा सोच रहे हैं और हमारी वित्त मंत्री जी बहुत अच्छा सोच रही हैं । जिन करोड़ों लोगों की नौकरी चली गई,अगर बिज़नेस चलेगा और बिज़नेस बचेगा,जो हमारे शिव सेना के साथी कह रहे थे, तब ही गरीब लोगों को नौकरी मिल सकती है, तब ही चीज़ें आगे बढ़ सकती हैं ।
सभापति जी, जितने भी अमेंडमेंट्स किए गए हैं, लोगों का काम है कहना,विपक्ष के लोग,हम लोग और कांग्रेसी भी कहेंगे ही,पर ज्यादातर लोगों के दो चेहरे हैं, दो तरह के चश्मे हैं,दो धारी तलवारें हैं, अपनी गलती,अपने लिए कोई बात हो तो हल्ला करेंगे, माफी मंगवाएंगे, लेकिन चार बार के एमपी को और जिनके घर में मुख्य मंत्री रहे हों, उनको …* कहेंगे और अपने शब्दों को वापस भी नहीं लेंगे । …(व्यवधान)जब आप बोलते हो तो हम डिस्टर्ब नहीं करते हैं । …(व्यवधान)मैं यह बात कहूंगा कि वे तो ऐसा कहेंगे ही, लेकिन जितनी भी छूट व्यापारियों को दी, कॉर्पोरेट सैक्टर को दी,जितने भी अमेंडमेंट्स किए, हम उनका स्वागत करते हैं,लेकिन मैं एक और बात कहना चाहता हूं । गुजरात और इनकी मुंबई की भाषा में धंधा,दिल्ली की भाषा में बिज़नेस और उत्तर प्रदेश,बिहार और हरियाणा की भाषा में व्यापार । …(व्यवधान)
सर, मैं आज देशहित में बोल रहा हूं,मैं आज नई बात बोल रहा हूं, जो आज तक हुई नहीं होगी, यह पक्की बात है । …(व्यवधान)हम उसको करते भी हैं, देखते भी हैं और समझते भी हैं, लेकिन असलियत में क्या कमी है और कहां है, सरकार को इसकी तरफ ध्यान देना पड़ेगा । अगर रिसर्च किया जाए या जो डॉक्ट्रेट की डिग्री है,कोई भी चीज़ जो आज सबसे बेहतर है, उस पर ध्यान रखना पड़ेगा । कांग्रेसी जब कानून बना रहे थे तो सोचते थे हमने बढ़िया बनाया । इन लोगों ने हजारों अमेंडमेंट्स कर दिए, ये सोचते हैं हमने इसे ठीक कर दिया । …(व्यवधान)
सर, मैं बिलकुल काम की बात पर आ रहा हूं । …(व्यवधान)असलियत यह है कि एक ऐसा मंत्रालय बनाना चाहिए,जो मंत्रालयों को कोऑर्डिनेट करे और एक मंत्रालय जो दूसरे मंत्रालय को कानूनी रूप से मार रहा है,उदाहरण के तौर पर कॉर्पोरेट्स भी आ जाते हैं,कंपनीज़ भी आ जाती हैं, एनसीएलटी में जाते हैं,एक छोटा सा आदमी जाकर पूरी कंपनी को डुबो देता है,पूरा कॉर्पोरेट सैक्टर मार देता है । यह कॉर्पोरेट मिनिस्ट्री का सब्जेक्ट है,जो सब्जेक्ट फाइनेंस मिनिस्ट्री से संबंधित है,उनके मंत्रालय को इस मंत्रालय ने मार दिया, इसलिए असलियत यह है कि आपस में तालमेल बैठाने के लिए एक मंत्रालय का कानून दूसरे मंत्रालय के कानून को न मारे, चाहे कितनी भी कोशिश कर ले और आगे न बढ़ पाएं, वहीं के वहीं खड़े रहें,अगर कोऑर्डिनेशन का बढ़िया तालमेल बैठ जाए, एक मंत्रालय दूसरे मंत्रालय को सपोर्ट करे तो आने वाले समय में लोगों को रोज़गार भी मिलेगा,देश तरक्की करेगा और देश की आर्थिक स्थिति संभल जाएगी । मोदी जी का जो पांच ट्रिलियन का सपना है, वह तब ही सफल हो सकता है, नहीं तो सफल नहीं हो पाएगा । आपका बहुत-बहुत धन्यवाद ।
SHRI B. B. PATIL (ZAHIRABAD): Sir, undoubtedly the changes proposed by the Companies Amendment Bill, 2020 have the potential of conferring long term benefits on stakeholders and investors by facilitating ‘Ease of Doing Business’ and providing a swifter redressal and enforcement mechanism for corporate non-compliance in India.
In addition, decriminalisation of offences under the Act is likely to yield intangible benefits in the form of protection of goodwill of a company that could otherwise get tarnished by criminal sanctions being imposed for minor technical or inadvertent lapses. As the Law Committee Report aptly observed while criminal sanctions are more grievous and permanent in nature, the cost of civil penalties may be absorbed as part of running a business in the ordinary course.
However, the legislators should not lose sight of the fact that decriminalization of certain offences under the Act could turn it into a toothless tiger which may fail to seek adequate and necessary compliance by the companies even in relation to matters of grave importance. Another concern, which is worth deliberating upon, is if the decriminalization proposed by CAB, 2020 will have the effect of encouraging an unbridled corporate culture of purging defaults by merely expending funds, then it is defeating the legislative intent with which the CAB, 2020 was introduced.
It is peculiar that CAB, 2020 has been proposed less than a year after CAA, 2019 was notified. Both these legislations are propelled by similar objectives and they seek to amend overlapping matters. The short time period, which has elapsed between enactment of CAA, 2019 and introduction of CAB, 2020 seems inadequate for the effects of legislative changes to corporate laws to percolate down the line to the intended beneficiaries, that is, the corporate entities.
While it would take some time for companies to reap the benefits of the amendments relating to decriminalization of offences and recategorization of penalties proposed under CAB, 2020, the balance, which is critical to attain the overall objectives of the Act itself, must not be lost.
HON. CHAIRPERSON : Now, come to the last portion.
SHRI B. B. PATIL : Lastly, I also request the hon. Finance Minister to release the outstanding dues from the power distribution companies to renewable energy producers of Telangana State as quoted in the PRAAPTI portal of the Union Power Ministry.
I also request the hon. Finance Minister to release Rs.5,420 crore towards GST compensation and another Rs.2,700 crore towards IGST dues to the Telangana State.
Our Telangana State was also denied its rightful entitlement in the grants to the urban local bodies recommended by the Fourteenth Finance Commission relating to the period, 2015-2020. While the Commission recommended unconditional basic grant of Rs.2,711 crore, the amount released by the Centre was Rs.2,502 crore, and thus there was a shortfall of Rs.208.22 crore.
HON. CHAIRPERSON : Patil Ji, please conclude.
SHRI B. B. PATIL : Though the State had fulfilled all the conditions attached to the performance grant of Rs.677.79 crore, the amount released to the State was only Rs.235.81 crore. Here again there was a shortfall of Rs.441.98 crore. Thus, the State was denied Rs.650.20 crore of the statutory grant to urban local bodies, though the full amount was released to some other States.
HON. CHAIRPERSON: You can place it on the Table.
*SHRI B. B. PATIL: In this context, I request you to arrange the immediate release of all pending dues under the Finance Commission, that is, a total of Rs.1,433.95 crore which includes the overdue first instalment of grant of Rs.468 crore to million-plus cities, the balance second instalment of grant of Rs.315.75 crore to the non-million plus cities and the pending statutory grants of Rs.650.20 crore recommended by the Fourteenth Finance Commission.
With these few words, I conclude. Thank you.* श्री गौरव गोगोई (कलियाबोर): सभापति महोदय,धन्यवाद । मैं आज जिस बिल पर बोलने वाला हूं, इस बिल का मूल उद्देश्य यह है कि कुछ ऑफेंसेज जो पहले क्रिमिनल इन नेचर थे, आज इस बिल के द्वारा उनको सिविल में कन्वर्ट करके डिक्रिमिनलाइज कर रहा है । इस बिल का मूल प्रावधान यही है । मेरी एक चिंता है, जिसे मैं आपके द्वारा व्यक्त कर रहा हूं । अगर आप वर्ष 2014 से देखें कि क्या प्रक्रिया रही है? आपने वर्ष 2014 में सबसे पहले कौन सा महत्वपूर्ण बिल लाने की कोशिश की – किसानों का भूमि अधिग्रहण बिल । उसके बाद आपने लेबर कोर्ट रिफॉर्म की कोशिश की, उसके बाद आप रिडक्शन इन कॉर्पोरेट टैक्स बिल लाए ।
आज देखा जा रहा है कि धीरे-धीरे प्राइवेटाइजेशन बढ़ता जा रहा है और एयरपोर्ट्स का प्राइवेटाइजेशन हुआ है । हाल ही में कौन सा बिल पारित हुआ, वह किसान का बिल था, जिसमें कॉन्ट्रैक्ट फार्मिंग हो, जिससे कॉर्पोरेट इंडिया का फायदा हो । मैं आपके द्वारा इस सरकार से पूछना चाहता हूं कि कॉपोरेट इंडिया को कितनी सुविधाएं इस सरकार के द्वारा मिल रही हैं? आज उनके क्रिमिनल ऑफेंसेज सिविल हो गए, उनका टैक्स रेट डिडक्शन हो गया और जैसा लेबर कोर्ट उन्होंने मांगा, वैसा लेबर कोर्ट उनको मिलने वाला है । वे कृषि क्षेत्र में निवेश करना चाहते हैं तो आज वे कॉन्ट्रैक्ट फार्मिंग के द्वारा इस क्षेत्र में घुस पा रहे हैं । लैण्ड एक्विज़िशन बिल के द्वारा विभिन्न-विभिन्न राज्य सरकारों से जो किसान की जमीन है, उसे ले रहे हैं । वास्तव में जो क्रिमिनल ऑफेंडर मेहुल चौकसी,नीरव मोदी हैं,आज भी देश के बाहर हैं ।
कॉर्पोरेट इंडिया को आपकी सरकार से इतना मिला, लेकिन कॉर्पोरेट इंडिया ने आज भारत को क्या दिया? आप डीक्रिमनलाईजेशन की बात करते हैं,लेकिन क्या आज क्रिमिनल ऑफेंसेज नहीं हो रहे हैं?आईसीआईसीआई बैंक में क्या हुआ? यस बैंक में क्या हुआ?आज भी नीरव मोदी और मेहुल चौकसी बाहर हैं । आपने कॉर्पोरेट इंडिया के टैक्स रेट कम कर दिए । मैं बार-बार विभिन्न स्टेंडिंग कमेटीज में पूछता हूं कि भारत सरकार ने यह जो कॉर्पोरेट टैक्स कम किया है, उससे भारत सरकार के रेवेन्यू में कितना लॉस हुआ है? कॉर्पोरेट इंडिया ने टैक्स रेट रिडक्शन होने के बाद से कितना प्राइवेट इंवेस्टमेंट किया है? कितने एडिशनल जॉब्स क्रिएट हुए हैं? आज तक यह ब्यौरा मुझे नहीं मिला है?कॉर्पोरेट टैक्स कम होने के बाद से कितना प्राइवेट इंवेस्टमेंट हुआ है? आज आप लेबर लॉ को डिफॉर्म करने जा रहे हैं,लेकिन आज की तारीख में बेरोजगारी की समस्या कितनी बढ़ रही है? कॉर्पोरेट इंडिया कोविड-19का बहाना लेकर लोगों को नौकरी से बाहर निकाल रहा है । इसलिए मैं चाहता हूं कि जब सरकार यह नियम लाए तो यह इंश्योर करे कि corporate India creates jobs, creates private investment and practices clean business. Thank you.
SHRI P. RAVEENDRANATH KUMAR (THENI): Thank you, Speaker, Sir, for giving me this opportunity to support the Companies (Amendment) Bill, 2020.
Sir, I take this opportunity to appreciate the hon. Finance Minister, who has initiated the bill to amend the Companies Act, 2013. This Bill is beneficial as it is a huge reform for trade and commerce.
I represent the State of Tamil Nadu whose economy is the third largest in the country and is bound to get a boost and become a preferred destination for business and investment. I would like to highlight that with strong financial infrastructure and a favourable business environment, which can be brought in by this Bill, Tamil Nadu can exponentially increase its GDP which is currently pegged at US$ 23 billion.
In pursuance of insertion of a new Section 418 A in this Bill, I welcome the move by the Union Government to establish a new bench of National Company Law Appellate Tribunal in Tamil Nadu at Chennai having jurisdiction of States like Tamil Nadu, Karnataka, Kerala, Andhra Pradesh, Telangana, Lakshadweep and Puducherry.
I also welcome the timely introduction of Companies Fresh Start Scheme (CFSS) by the Union Government through a separate notification dated 30th March, 2020 to benefit the corporates during the unprecedented situation created due to spread of COVID-19. It allows companies to complete their pending statutory filing without being subjected to any additional fees or penalty.
With these words, I support this Bill.
श्री दिलेश्वर कामैत (सुपौल): धन्यवाद सभापति महोदय, मैं आपका आभार व्यक्त करता हूं कि आपने मुझे कम्पनी (संशोधन) विधेयक, 2020 पर अपनी बात रखने का मौका दिया ।
इस कम्पनी एक्ट को वर्ष 2013 में लाया गया था ताकि समय पर कम्पनी से संबंधित नियम को मजबूत बनाया जा सके और समय आने पर जरूरतों के अनुसार इसमें अमेंडमेंट यानी सुधार किया जा सके । मजबूत बदलाव जैसे अकाउंटिबिलिटी,इंवेस्टर्स को प्रोटेक्शन और कॉर्पोरेट गर्वेनेंस का समाधान आसानी से बिना क्रिमिनल कोर्ट केस के किया जा सके ।
21.54 hrs (Hon. Speaker in the Chair) वर्ष 2019 में सरकार ने कम्पनी लॉ कमेटी का गठन किया ताकि कम्पनी अधिनियम, 2013 के प्रोविजन को गम्भीरता के आधार पर दंडमुक्त करने और देश में कॉर्पोरटरों के लिए बेहतर ईज़ ऑफ लिविंग की व्यवस्था बनायी जा सके । इस कमेटी ने 62 रिकमण्डेशन दिए हैं । कम्पनी एक्ट 2013 में बदलाव से 62 एक संबंधित है । कमेटी में यह भी सुझाव आया कि क्रिमिनेलिटी को कुछ केसों में से कैसे दूर किया जा सके, जो कि लार्ज पब्लिक इंटरेस्ट में सहायक हो और जिन केसों में फ्रॉड शामिल नहीं हो । कुछ मामलों की स्वीकृति के लिए वैकल्पिक व्यवस्था का सुझाव दिया गया । समिति ने डिसक्रिमिनेशन यानी भेदभाव के पहलू पर इस 96वें प्रोविजन में बदलाव का सुझाव दिया ।
महोदय,इस संबंध में एजेन्सियों के द्वारा गृह मंत्रालय को उपलब्ध कराई गई जानकारी के अनुसार वर्ष 2015 में बैंकों के साथ वित्तीय अनियमितताओं में शामिल भारतीयों के साथ-साथ…(व्यवधान)
माननीय अध्यक्ष : माननीय सदस्य,आपकी स्पीच पढ़ी हुई मान ली गई है ।
…( व्यवधान)
श्री दिलेश्वर कामैत : महोदय, मैं बस समाप्त कर रहा हूं । आपराधिक जांच का सामना कर रहे भारतीयों की संख्या 72 है और इन मामलों के अपराधों से की गई कमाई की भारी रकम शामिल है । मैं आज की इस चर्चा में इस कंपनी (संशोधन) विधेयक का समर्थन करता हूं ।
21.55 hrs 21.56 hrs COMPANIES (AMENDMENT) BILL, 2020 – Contd.
SHRI N. K. PREMACHANDRAN (KOLLAM): Sir, I thank you very much. I will take only two minutes.
Sir, the original Companies Act of 1956 was drastically amended and the entire law relating to the companies’ law was consolidated, and the Companies Act of 2013 had been enacted. It was a consolidated and comprehensive legislation enacted by this Parliament and the Companies Act of 2013 has come into existence, but it is quite unfortunate to note that subsequent to 2013, if we examine, every year during the last six years, not less than six amendments have taken place to the Companies Act of 2013. That is not a good, healthy legislative process because piecemeal amendments to the original Act, and consecutive and consistent amendments to the Act, will be creating so many problems which have to be avoided. Thereby, much legislative wisdom has also not been applied. The hon. Minister in the opening remarks has already said that during the operational defects, they are doing these consecutive amendments, but that has to be taken care of.
Regarding the contents of the Bill, it is being done absolutely in the name of ease of doing business. If we examine the Government from the day of its inception in office, it is always talking about the ease of doing business. Gaurav Gogoiji has just now told us that in almost all the legislation – even we have discussed the last day the legislation relating to farming – everything is oriented towards the corporate houses and the business houses in the country. We have to respect the business houses for they are also doing a wonderful job and playing a very important role in the economic growth of the country, but the entire administration – governance or legislation – is concentrated on the beneficial interest of the corporate houses and business houses. It is not good.
Here also, the decriminalisation of provisions is being done. It has already been stated that 75 changes are taking place and 64 sections are being amended by this Amendment Bill. So many criminal punishments leading to imprisonment are being taken away and the fine is becoming very less. As Arvindji has rightly said, that will be giving a very good message to the corporates and the companies, that is, the entire criminal offences are being taken away and they will benefit from it. So, stringent measures have to be taken to see that all the offences are being dealt with in a serious way.
The last point which I would like to make is regarding my constituency. Hon. Finance Minister may be knowing very well that not only in my State, but in four South Indian States, the big and popular finance companies have been defrauding and cheating thousands and thousands of poor people. In this regard, the State Government has requested for a CBI inquiry. The High Court has also approved a CBI inquiry. I would urge upon the Government of India to immediately order a probe by CBI. These people have defrauded more than Rs. 3,000 crore and after defrauding, they have left the country. This is happening everywhere in the country. That has to be checked. So, I urge upon the Government of India to order a CBI inquiry into the popular finance scams which are affecting depositors and customers of four South Indian States.
With these words, I conclude. Thank you very much.
माननीय अध्यक्ष : कुंवर दानिश अली जी, आप बस दो मिनट में अपना भाषण समाप्त कीजिए ।
…( व्यवधान)
कुंवर दानिश अली (अमरोहा) :अध्यक्ष महोदय,मुझे आपने इस कंपनी (संशोधन)विधेयक, 2020 पर बोलने का मौका दिया है, इसके लिए मैं आपको बहुत-बहुत धन्यवाद देता हूं । इस बिल का जिस्ट यह समझ में आता है कि कई क्रिमिनल अफेन्सेज़ को डिक्रिमिनलाइज्ड किया जा रहा है, अच्छी बात है । लेकिन मेरी आपके माध्यम से माननीय मंत्री जी से यह गुजारिश है कि जो लॉज़ हैं,उनको पूरे तरीके से, अच्छी तरीके से लागू कराया जाए, जो नहीं हो रहे हैं ।
मैं अभी पिछले हफ्ते जब अपने क्षेत्र में था तो इतने गरीब लोग मेरे पास आए कि साहब कंपनी थी, वह पैसा इकट्ठा कर के भाग गई । मेरी कंस्टीट्यूएंसी जैसे छोटे व गरीब इलाके में कंपनी सैकड़ों-करोड़ों रुपये ले कर भाग गई । कोई बोट बाईक के नाम पर, कोई किसी चीज़ के नाम पर । मेरा सीधा आपके माध्यम से यह अनुरोध है कि अभी कोरोना के दौरान विशाखापटनम के अंदर एक बड़ी दुर्घटना घटी,जिसमें गैस लीक हुई थी, कोई एलजी कंपनी थी,जिसमें कई लोग मारे गए । ऐसा ही एक हादसा मेरी कंस्टीट्यूएंसी में अमरोहा में गजरौला के अंदर टेवा एपीआई लिमिटेड कंपनी में रात में गैस लीक होने से हुआ । हमारा डिस्ट्रिक्ट फायर ऑफिसर वहां जाता है, मल्टी नेशनल कंपनी है, बीस मिनट तक डिस्ट्रिक्ट फायर ऑफिसर को अंदर नहीं घुसने दिया जाता है और वह ऑन रिकॉर्ड है, उसका वीडियो पर भी बयान है,अखबारों में है । लेकिन इन कंपनियों को इतने अधिकार दे दिए गए हैं कि वे कोई कानून मानने को तैयार नहीं हैं और बदकिस्मती इस बात की है कि कहीं न कहीं हमारे जो अफसर लोग हैं – राज्य सरकार के हों या केन्द्र सरकार के हों,वे कहीं न कहीं उनको बचाने का काम करते हैं । मेरी आपके माध्यम से माननीय वित्त मंत्री जी से यही अपील है कि जो कानून कंपनीज एक्ट में मौजूद हैं, उन कानूनों को सख्ती से लागू किया जाए और ऐसी दुर्घटना, जैसी विशाखापटनम में हुई, ऐसी दुर्घटना से मेरे अमरोहा क्षेत्र के गजरौला को बचाया जाए और टेवा एपीआई जैसी कंपनियों को यह खुला लाइसेंस न दिया जाए कि रात में गैस लीक हो और वे हमारे अधिकारियों की भी न सुनें ।
धन्यवाद ।
کنوردانش علی (امروہہ): محترم اسپیکرصاحب،آپنےمجھےاسکمپنےامینڈمینٹبِل پربولنےکاموقعدیااسکےلئےبہتبہتشکریہ۔اسبِلکاجِسٹیہسمجھمیںآتاہےکہکئیکریمِنلاوفینسز کوڈیکریمِنلائزڈکیاجارہاہے،اچھیباتہے۔لیکنمیریآپکےذریعہسےعزّتمآبمنتریجیسےگزارشہےکہجولازہیں،انکوپوریطریقےسےاچھیطریقےسےلاگوکرایاجائے،جونہیںہورہےہیں۔ میںابھیپچھلےہفتہجباپنےپارلیمانیحلقہمیںتھاتواتنےغریبلوگمیرےپاسآئےکہصاحبکمپنیتھی،وہپیسہاکٹھہکرکےبھاگگئی۔میرےپارلیمانیحلقہجیسےچھوٹےوغریبعلاقےمیںکمپنیسیکڑوںکروڑوںروپئےلےکربھاگگئی۔کوئیبوٹبائککےنامپر،کوئیکسیچیزکےنامپر۔میریسیدھیآپکےذریعہسےگزارشہےکہابھیکوروناکےدورانوشاکھاپٹنممیںایکبڑیدُرگھٹناگھٹی،جسمیںگیسلیکہوئیتھی،کوئیایل۔جی۔کمپنیتھی،جسمیںکئیلوگمارےگئے،ایساہیایکحادثہمیرےاپنےپارلیمانیحلقہامروہہمیںگجرولہکےاندرٹیوااے۔پی۔آئی۔لِمیٹیڈکمپنیمیںراتمیںگیسلیکہونےسےہوا۔ہماراڈسٹرکٹفائرآفیسروہاںآتاہے،ملٹینیشنلکمپنیہے، 20 منٹ تکڈسٹرکٹفائرآفیسرکواندرنہیںگھُسنےنہیںدیاجاتاہے،اوروہآنریکارڈہے،اسکاویڈیوںپربھیبیانہے،اخباروںمیںہے۔لیکنانکمپنیوںکواتنےحقوقدےدئےگئےہیںکہوہکوئیقانونماننےکوتیارہینہیںہیں،اوربدقسمتیاسباتکیہےکہکہیںنہکہیںجوہمارےافسرلوگہیں۔ریاستیسرکارکےہوںیامرکزیسرکارکےہوںوہکہیںنہ کہیںانکوبچانےکاکامکرتےہیں۔میریآپکےذریعہمنتریجیسےیہیاپیلہےکہجوقانونکمپنیزایکٹمیںموجودہیں،انقانونوںکوسختیسےلاگوںکیاجائے،اورایسےحادثاتجیسےوشاکھاپٹنممیںہوا،ایسےحادثاتسےمیرےامروہہپالیمانیحلقہکےگجرولہ کوبچایاجائےاورٹیوااے۔پی۔آئی۔جیسیکمپنیوںکویہکھلالائسنسنہدیاجائےکہراتمیںگیسلیکہواوروہہمارےافسرانکیبھینہسُنیں۔ (ختمشد) माननीय अध्यक्ष: माननीय मंत्री जी ।
वित्त मंत्री तथा कॉरपोरेट कार्य मंत्री (श्रीमती निर्मला सीतारमण): स्पीकर सर, आपका धन्यवाद और मैं दस बजे के समय जवाब दे रही हॅूं, इसीलिए मैं संक्षेप में उत्तर दे रही हॅूं ।
सर, करीब 10-11 सदस्यों ने इस चर्चा में भाग लिया है । मैं समझ रही हॅूं कि जो कंसर्न एन.के. प्रेमचन्द्रन जी ने वायस किया कि बार-बार हम इतने सारे अमेंडमेंट्स क्यों कर रहे हैं,मैं सिर्फ एक विषय प्रेमचन्द्रन जी के सामने रखना चाह रही हॅूं कि कंपनीज़ एक्ट में सिर्फ बड़ी-बड़ी कंपनीज़ ही नहीं हैं, एमएसएमई और छोटी कम्पनियां भी कंपनीज़ एक्ट के तहत रजिस्टर हुई कंपनीज़ हैं,जो डीक्रिमिनलाइज़ेशन हम कर रहे हैं,वह छोटी कंपनीज़ को भी फायदा देगा । इसीलिए उधर छोटे-छोटे ऑफेंसेज़के लिए उनको पकड़ कर जेल में डालने से एक परिवार और छोटा कारोबार सब सत्यानाश हो जाएगा । इसीलिए डीक्रिमिनेलाइज़ेशन का यह प्रयत्न आप सबसे मैं चाहती हॅूं, सपोर्ट के साथ पारित होना है । डीक्रिमिनेलाइज़ेशन कब से है? सन् 2013 में जब यह कानून बनाया, तब से 134 सैक्शंस में पीनल प्रोविज़ंस थे और आज भी वे 134 से कम होते-होते आज अगर हम इसको पारित करते हैं, तो 124 तक कम हो जाएंगे,मगर इसमें अहम बात यह है कि जो बहुत सीरियस ऑफेंसेज़ हैं, उसको नॉन-कम्पाउंडेबल ऑफेंसेज़ कहते हैं,उसका नंबर 2013 में भी और आज भी वही 35 रहेगा । नॉन-कम्पाउंडेबल ऑफेंसेज़ कौन से हैं? जिसमें फ्रॉड होता है,जो अभी माननीय सदस्य दानिश अली ने बताया कि सीरियसली मेरी कंस्टीट्यूएंसी में यह हुआ, विशाखापतनम में वह हुआ, ऐसे फ्रॉड वाले काम करने वाले या इंजरी टू पब्लिक इंट्रेस्ट करने वाले या तो डिसीट करने वाले,फ्रॉड, डिसीट और इंजरी टू पब्लिक करने वाले, जो उदाहरण माननीय सदस्य ने दिए हैं,उनको छोड़ने के कुछ भी प्रावधान इधर नहीं हैं । नॉन-कम्पाउंडेबल ऑफेंसेज़ की संख्या सन् 2013 में 35थी, आज भी वही 35 है, उसमें हम छूट देने का कोई साहस नहीं कर रहे हैं । इसीलिए जब हम बात करते हैं,इसमें जितने भी अमेंडमेंट्स हैं, उसमें 48 ऐसे सैक्शंस को चेंज कर रहे हैं, जिससे डीक्रिमिनेलाइजेशन होगा । 17 ऐसे हैं, जिससे ईज़ ऑफ लिविंग होगा । ईज़ ऑफ लिविंग मतलब जो कंपनी चला रहा है, उसको यह करो,यह फाइलिंग करो,यह ऑफिस ऐसे रन करो, यह सब भी बर्डनसम रहता है, इसीलिए उसका कम रहे हैं ।
एक नया चैप्टर जोड़ रहे हैं, जिससे ग्रामीण लेवल पर बार-बार कम्पनीज़ एक्ट और आईबीसी की चर्चा में एग्रीकल्चर के बारे में बोलते हैं, किसानों के बारे में बोलते हैं, जो सही बात है । अभी हम जो कर रहे हैं, एक पुराना चैप्टर कंपनीज़ एक्ट, 1956 से निकाल कर, वह तो सबस्यूम हो गया है, 2013 के कानून में, मगर उसमें एक चैप्टर लाकर प्रोड्यूसर्स ऑर्गेनाइजेशन के लिए फायदेमंद हो,ऐसा एक नया चैप्टर जोड़ रहे हैं । यह भी इस कानून में है । क्यों जोड़ रहे हैं? जो फार्मर्स प्रोड्यूसर्स ऑर्गेनाइजेशन हैं, सरकार ने प्रोत्साहन देकर उसका सीड कैपिटल, उसका फंड वगैरह भी अरेंज करके उनसे डायरेक्टली मार्केट करने का प्रावधान किया है । एफपीओज़- फार्मर्स प्रोड्यूसर्स ऑर्गेनाइजेशन्स उदाहरण के लिए ले रही हूँ, ये प्रोड्यूसर्स कम्पनी सब को वर्तित है । मगर पर्टिक्यूलरली,बिकॉज एग्रीकल्चरल फार्मर्स प्रोड्यूसर्स ऑर्गेनाइजेशन,इस सरकार के द्वारा ऐसे एफपीओ फॉर्म करने के लिए 10 हजार नम्बर रखे हैं, उन सब को भी इस प्रावधान से फायदा मिलेगा । इसलिए डिक्रिमिनलाइजेशन का 48 है । नया चैप्टर 17 जोड़कर, 17 ईज़ ऑफ लिविंग के लिए है । संक्षेप में इतना ही बोलूंगी । बाकी सब मैम्बर्स ने इसमें ध्यान से सोच-विचार करके ही आपको इनपुट दिए हैं । Largely, my answers answer all Members’ concerns.
माननीय अध्यक्ष : प्रश्न यह है:
“कि कंपनी अधिनियम, 2013 का और संशोधन करने वाले विधयेक पर विचार किया जाए ।” प्रस्ताव स्वीकृत हुआ ।
अब सभा विधेयक पर खंडवार विचार करेगी ।
Clause 2 Amendment of Section 2 माननीय अध्यक्ष : श्री एन. के. प्रेमचन्द्रन, क्या आप संशोधन संख्या 1 और2 प्रस्तुत करना चाहते हैं?
SHRI N. K. PREMACHANDRAN: Sir, I beg to move:
Page 2, line 3,– omit “or intend to list”. (1) Page 2, line 4,– for “in consultation with” substitute “with the consent of”. (2) माननीय अध्यक्ष : अब मैं श्री एन. के. प्रेमचन्द्रन द्वारा खण्ड 2 में प्रस्तुत संशोधन संख्या 1 और2 को सभा के समक्ष मतदान के लिए रखता हूँ । संशोधन मतदान के लिए रखे गए तथा अस्वीकृत हुए ।
माननीय अध्यक्ष : प्रश्न यह है :
“कि खंड 2 विधेयक का अंग बने ।” प्रस्ताव स्वीकृत हुआ ।
खंड 2 विधेयक में जोड़ दिया गया ।
Clause 3 Amendment of Section 8 माननीय अध्यक्ष : श्री एन. के. प्रेमचन्द्रन, क्या आप संशोधन संख्या 3 और4 प्रस्तुत करना चाहते हैं? SHRI N. K. PREMACHANDRAN: Sir, I beg to move:
Page 2, lines 7 and 8,– for “three years or” shall be omitted’ substitute “five years or” shall be substituted’. (3) Page 2, lines 9 and 10,– for “twenty-five lakh rupees” substitute “thirty lakh rupees, or with both”. (4)
माननीय अध्यक्ष : अब मैं श्री एन. के. प्रेमचन्द्रन द्वारा खण्ड 3 में प्रस्तुत संशोधन संख्या 3 और4 को सभा के समक्ष मतदान के लिए रखता हूँ । संशोधन मतदान के लिए रखे गए तथा अस्वीकृत हुए ।
माननीय अध्यक्ष : प्रश्न यह है :
“कि खंड 3 विधेयक का अंग बने ।” प्रस्ताव स्वीकृत हुआ ।
खंड 3 विधेयक में जोड़ दिया गया ।
Clause 4 Amendment of Section 16 माननीय अध्यक्ष : श्री एन. के. प्रेमचन्द्रन, क्या आप संशोधन संख्या 5 प्रस्तुत करना चाहते हैं? SHRI N. K. PREMACHANDRAN: Sir, I beg to move:
Page 2, line 13,– for “three months” substitute “four months”. (5)
माननीय अध्यक्ष : अब मैं श्री एन. के. प्रेमचन्द्रन द्वारा खण्ड 4 में प्रस्तुत संशोधन संख्या 5 को सभा के समक्ष मतदान के लिए रखता हूँ । संशोधन मतदान के लिए रखा गया तथा अस्वीकृत हुआ ।
माननीय अध्यक्ष : प्रश्न यह है :
“कि खंड 4 विधेयक का अंग बने ।” प्रस्ताव स्वीकृत हुआ ।
खंड 4 विधेयक में जोड़ दिया गया ।
खंड 5 विधेयक में जोड़ दिया गया ।
Clause 6 Amendment of Section 26 माननीय अध्यक्ष : श्री एन. के. प्रेमचन्द्रन, क्या आप संशोधन संख्या 6 और7 प्रस्तुत करना चाहते हैं? SHRI N. K. PREMACHANDRAN: These are very valid amendments. Sir, I beg to move:
Page 2, lines 35 and 36,– for “three years or” shall be omitted’ substitute “four years or” shall be substituted’. (6) Page 2, line 37,– for “three lakh rupees” substitute “four lakh rupees, or with both”. (7)
माननीय अध्यक्ष : अब मैं श्री एन. के. प्रेमचन्द्रन द्वारा खण्ड 6 में प्रस्तुत संशोधन संख्या 6 और7 को सभा के समक्ष मतदान के लिए रखता हूँ । संशोधन मतदान के लिए रखे गए तथा अस्वीकृत हुए ।
माननीय अध्यक्ष : प्रश्न यह है :
“कि खंड 6 विधेयक का अंग बने ।” प्रस्ताव स्वीकृत हुआ ।
खंड 6 विधेयक में जोड़ दिया गया ।
Clauses 7 to 66 माननीय अध्यक्ष : श्री एन. के. प्रेमचन्द्रन, क्या आप संशोधन संख्या 8 प्रस्तुत करना चाहते हैं? SHRI N. K. PREMACHANDRAN: Sir, I am not moving the amendment No. 8. माननीय अध्यक्ष : प्रश्न यह है :
“कि खंड 7 से66 विधेयक का अंग बने ।” प्रस्ताव स्वीकृत हुआ ।
खंड 7 से 66 विधेयक में जोड़ दिए गए ।
खंड 1, अधिनियमन सूत्र और विधेयक का पूरा नाम विधेयक में जोड़ दिए गए । माननीय अध्यक्ष : माननीय मंत्री जी, अब आप प्रस्ताव करें कि विधेयक पारित किया जाए । SHRIMATI NIRMALA SITHARAMAN: Sir, I beg to move:
“That the Bill be passed.” माननीय अध्यक्ष : प्रश्न यह है:
“कि विधेयक पारित किया जाए ।” प्रस्ताव स्वीकृत हुआ ।
माननीय अध्यक्ष : सभा की कार्यवाही रविवार, दिनांक20 सितम्बर, 2020 को तीन बजे तक के लिए स्थगित की जाती है । BUSINESS ADVISORY COMMITTEE 17th Report