CNG lobby takes govt to court over cess

High court issues notices to concerned ministries, stakeholders.


Naeem Sahoutara December 21, 2012
CNG lobby takes govt to court over cess

KARACHI: The apex CNG association of the country, the All Pakistan CNG Association (APCNGA) has taken the federal and provincial governments to court over imposition of the gas infrastructure development cess (GIDC), terming it a violation of the Petroleum Policy, 1994.

The Sindh High Court put the ministries of law, justice and parliamentary affairs, petroleum, and chairman of the Oil and Gas Regulatory Authority and managing directors of the Sui Northern Gas Pipelines and gas companies in its crosshairs in the light of the CNG stations’ owners’ petition.

The bench also issued notice to the deputy attorney general and advocate general of Sindh to file arguments of the concerned governmental authorities before the next date.

All Pakistan CNG Association former chairman Suleman Sulemanjee said that under the Petroleum Policy, 1994, the gas tariff for the CNG station operators was at par with the industrial sector. Since 2007 the tariff for the station operators increased manifold in complete disregard of the policy.

The lawyer representing the stations owners argued that the Parliament lacked competence to enact the Act to levy any cess on the subject. “This cess can only be levied on the minerals, oil, natural gas and other minerals used in generation of energy.”

The association’s representative said that purpose of imposing cess was for specifically for infrastructure development work on the Iran-Pakistan Pipeline Project, Turkmenistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan-India Pipeline Project, LNG or other price equalisation of other imported alternative fuel including LNG.

He pleaded to the court to declare imposition and collection of GIDC arbitrary and against the Constitution.

Published in The Express Tribune, December 21st, 2012.

 

COMMENTS

Replying to X

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.

For more information, please see our Comments FAQ