FORM 20-F Grupo Casa Saba, S.A.B. de C.V.

Table of Contents
In the tax authority’s opinion, the Company failed to perform the provision of aggregating the amount of tax losses discussed above to the taxable income; therefore, the tax authority
determined a tax liability in the amount of Ps. 160,692 that included related charges amounting to Ps. 98,609, in September 2011. Subsequently, in December 2011, Management rejected
the observations made by the tax authority and filed a motion for reconsideration. Management estimates that there are reasonable elements for obtaining a result favorable to the
Company’s interests; therefore, it considers that there is no present obligation that can be estimated and recorded in accordance with Mexican FRS. Therefore, it is not possible to
foresee or anticipate any result due to it is a litigation matter.
c) Through official letters dated October 7, 2011 and April 20, 2012, the tax authorities notified Casa Saba and Drogueros that they had omitted accruing income for income tax
purposes of fiscal 2005 in the amount of Ps.531,279 and Ps.59,204, respectively, for accumulative inventory. At the date of the auditors’ report, the Group’s management is analyzing the
possibility of challenging that resolution.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, Management considers that it has met the requirement indicated by the authorities, since it accrued the item referred to above during fiscal
2011. Pursuant to the above, Management considers that there is no contingency charged to those subsidies.
d) In February 2010, the Company filed an appeal for constitutional relief against the provisions that amend the consolidation regime, effective beginning January 1, 2010. In
August 2010, the Federal Tax Court handed down a ruling in favor of the Company to not pay deferred income tax in fiscal years 1999 to 2009, as set forth in the reform mentioned. In
November 2010, the tax authority challenged the ruling. However, Management estimates that there is no contingency charged to the Company, as the provisions whose
unconstitutionality was challenged were applied by the Company.
e) In November 2011, the Company filed a notification of “claims on inaccuracies or misrepresentations of the representations and guarantees contained in the Promise Stock
Purchase Agreement of Farmacias Ahumada, S.A.”, with the sellers dated May 17, 2010. Accordingly, the Company requested an indemnification payment in the amount of USD
$22,335,484 (Ps. 268,026, approximately). At the date of the auditors’ report, the resolution of these matters is in a preliminary stage and their conclusion might not be short-term.
In accordance with the contract, the sellers drew up certain representations regarding FASA in favor of the Company, which guaranteed the Company the effectiveness thereof, and
assumed the obligation of indemnifying the damages caused as a result of any misrepresentation or inaccuracy in connection with certain representations and captions of the financial
statements.
f) In August 2011, FASA was notified of action brought against it by its competitor Cruz Verde, S.A., which claims presumed damages related to monopolistic practices. The
figure claimed amounts to USD $23,000,000. The preliminary report of the external advisors engaged by FASA indicates that it is not very likely that there will be a negative effect on the
Company’s consolidated financial statements.
g) In January 2009, Farmacias Benavides filed a claim for a refund with the Mexican tax authorities of a income tax paid in excess in the amount of Ps. 15,000, derived from 2002 and
2003. In April 2010, the authority rejected that claim; therefore, the subsidiary filed a motion for reconsideration against that resolution, and it is waiting for a ruling to be handed down.
h) Due to the sale of the stock of FASA Peru, the buyer may claim an indemnification for the possible inaccuracy in representations and/or nonperformance of the obligations
assumed in an amount equal to higher than USD $500,000 without exceeding USD $10,000,000. The term for petitioning the indemnification expires on April 20, 2013. At the date of the
auditors’ report, Management considers that there is no present obligation that can be estimated and recorded in accordance with Mexican FRS.
F-50