AIRLINK 74.00 Decreased By ▼ -0.25 (-0.34%)
BOP 5.14 Increased By ▲ 0.09 (1.78%)
CNERGY 4.55 Increased By ▲ 0.13 (2.94%)
DFML 37.15 Increased By ▲ 1.31 (3.66%)
DGKC 89.90 Increased By ▲ 1.90 (2.16%)
FCCL 22.40 Increased By ▲ 0.20 (0.9%)
FFBL 33.03 Increased By ▲ 0.31 (0.95%)
FFL 9.75 Decreased By ▼ -0.04 (-0.41%)
GGL 10.75 Decreased By ▼ -0.05 (-0.46%)
HBL 115.50 Decreased By ▼ -0.40 (-0.35%)
HUBC 137.10 Increased By ▲ 1.26 (0.93%)
HUMNL 9.95 Increased By ▲ 0.11 (1.12%)
KEL 4.60 Decreased By ▼ -0.01 (-0.22%)
KOSM 4.83 Increased By ▲ 0.17 (3.65%)
MLCF 39.75 Decreased By ▼ -0.13 (-0.33%)
OGDC 138.20 Increased By ▲ 0.30 (0.22%)
PAEL 27.00 Increased By ▲ 0.57 (2.16%)
PIAA 24.24 Decreased By ▼ -2.04 (-7.76%)
PIBTL 6.74 Decreased By ▼ -0.02 (-0.3%)
PPL 123.62 Increased By ▲ 0.72 (0.59%)
PRL 27.40 Increased By ▲ 0.71 (2.66%)
PTC 13.90 Decreased By ▼ -0.10 (-0.71%)
SEARL 61.75 Increased By ▲ 3.05 (5.2%)
SNGP 70.15 Decreased By ▼ -0.25 (-0.36%)
SSGC 10.52 Increased By ▲ 0.16 (1.54%)
TELE 8.57 Increased By ▲ 0.01 (0.12%)
TPLP 11.10 Decreased By ▼ -0.28 (-2.46%)
TRG 64.02 Decreased By ▼ -0.21 (-0.33%)
UNITY 26.76 Increased By ▲ 0.71 (2.73%)
WTL 1.38 No Change ▼ 0.00 (0%)
BR100 7,874 Increased By 36.2 (0.46%)
BR30 25,599 Increased By 139.8 (0.55%)
KSE100 75,342 Increased By 411.7 (0.55%)
KSE30 24,214 Increased By 68.6 (0.28%)

KARACHI: The Sindh High Court (SHC) has granted stay to Reckitt Benckiser Pakistan Limited against payment of Gas Infrastructure Development Cess (GIDC) on the grounds that the said amount despite provision in financial statements was not charged and recovered from the customers.

According to a written order on a suit filed by Reckitt Benckiser Pakistan released on Saturday, the SHC restrained the defendants, the Ministry of Energy, the Sui Southern Gas Company and others, from taking any coercive action against the plaintiff over non-payment of installments of the GIDC arrears showing in the bill.

According to the orders, the counsel for the plaintiff submitted that his client was engaged in the business of manufacturing and marketing of household products and that it fell under the category of the gas consumers who had neither collected the GIDC from their clients/customers nor passed on to their clients and customers addition in the cost of goods.

The counsel stated that in the period between 2011 and 2020 the plaintiff had not paid the GIDC to the defendant, the SSGC, on the basis of injunctive orders and reported judgments of the Supreme Court of Pakistan in the Federation of Pakistan V. Durrani Ceramics and others (2014 SCMR 1630) case.

The counsel stated that the plaintiffs never collected the GIDC from their clients/customers and did not even pass it on to their clients, which is evident from the income tax returns, books of accounts and customers auditor's report.

In case, a record of the company's showing non-receiving of the GIDC from its customers/clients is not filed with the memo of the plaint, shall be filed along with statement within seven days.

The counsel stated that in similar and other circumstances, other suits including suit no 1185/2020 have been filed wherein via order dated 16-09-2020, the defendants were restrained from taking any coercive action against the plaintiffs for non-payment of bill issued to them showing arrears including disconnection of gas and prayed the court to be treated the same.

The court ordered issuance of notices to the defendants and restrained them from taking any coercive action against the plaintiffs for non-payment of installments of GIDC arrears showing in the bill till the next date of hearing. The court directed the plaintiff to pay the current bill within the due date.

Copyright Business Recorder, 2020

Comments

Comments are closed.