126
For the fiscal years that have not been inspected by the tax authorities (as reported in the above table), there is
a possibility of additional tax imposition. Therefore the Group assesses, on an annual basis, the contingent li-
abilities regarding additional taxes from tax inspections in respect of prior years and makes relevant provisions
where this is deemed necessary. The Management assesses that apart from the recorded provisions which
as at 31.12.2012 amount to € 3,4mil., any tax differences that may arise in the future will not have a material
impact on the financial position, results and cash flows of the Group.
Other Contingent Assets & Liabilities
Aluminium S.A. , a subsidiary firm of the MYTILINAIOS HOLDINGS S.A. has submitted a legal action against
Public Power Corporation / CCP (henceforth the “Provider”) regarding the validity of the denunciation from the
last one on 25-6-1960 of the original contract of energy supply. At the same time, the Group did not accept its
integration in the invoice A – 150 (High Voltage Invoice) because it was subject to a special regime of invoicing
on a legal and also conventional aspect ….which was different form the one applied to all other industrial (B2B)
clients due to the specific consumer specifications of it (size and stability of the consumption).
In addition, the ALUMINIUM S.A. contested the invoicing of the electrical energy supplied by the Provider as
a whole after the decision no Δ5/ΗΛ/Β/Φ29/23860/2007 of the Ministry of Development (MD) was set in force,
which regulates among other issues the deregulation of the high voltage invoices. Specifically, it rejected the
one-sided increase imposed by the Provider from July 2008 on the electrical energy sale invoice when it ap-
plied wrongfully the decision of the MD regarding the abolition of the regulated high voltage invoice and when
it ignored the obligation of the Provider arising from this aforesaid decision to negotiate the invoices with the
high voltage clients, with the highest price limit 10% on the valid invoice until 30.06.08.
Specifically, the subsidiary firm of the Group contests invoicing process as a whole of the electrical energy
from the Provider, as there has been no negotiation whatsoever between them, as provided by the decision of
the Ministry, while this is the continuance of the abolished regulated industry invoice (A150) with a surcharge
of 10%. In particular, ALUMINIUM S.A.:
Contested from the beginning the invoicing of the electrical energy supplied by the Provider after 1-7-2008,
basing its contestation on the fact that this was levied in an arbitrary and one-sided way, without being based
on a binding decision of the administration, as was the case until then according the regulated invoice status
(to which the firm never accepted its integration) with no prior negotiations and setting a reasonable time
period to the Provider for the conventional / contract definition of a price which would be fair, reasonable and
equivalent to the supply.
It rejected the payment of the invoices which regarded the one-sided levied increase of 10% asking at the same
time to issue a credit invoice which it issued itself after rejection of the Provider.
It accepted to pay off reserving the rest of the value of the invoices in the context of good faith and for a transi-
tional period, until the conclusion of the negotiations to which both parties should have come to.
