A serious legal controversy has emerged following a press release issued by the Inland Revenue Service Officers Association (IRSOA), which has now been formally challenged through a comprehensive legal notice alleging defamation, false imputation, and misuse of institutional authority.
Sources told ProPakistani that the legal notice falsely and maliciously portrayed an Advocate of the Supreme Court of Pakistan as having initiated “malicious or retaliatory actions” and engaged in the “misuse of criminal proceedings.”
The notice states that these allegations are defamatory per se, entirely baseless, and aimed at maligning the professional integrity, reputation, and bona fide legal conduct of the Supreme Court advocate, who is known for public interest litigation, whistleblowing against maladministration, and the enforcement of taxpayers’ and lawyers’ rights.
Significantly, the Lahore Tax Bar Association, a premier body of tax professionals established in 1947, has publicly endorsed the stance of the aggrieved advocate through formal resolutions. The association condemned the alleged retaliatory conduct by revenue authorities and demanded strict action under the Lawyers Welfare and Protection Act, 2023.
These resolutions, addressed to the Chairman of the Federal Board of Revenue, the Punjab Bar Council, and the Punjab Inspector General of Police, have been cited as independent validation of the legitimacy of the legal actions taken.
The legal notice demands the immediate withdrawal and retraction of the impugned press release, an unconditional public apology with equal prominence, a written cease-and-desist undertaking, and compensatory damages of Rs. 100 million for reputational harm, mental anguish, and professional loss.
The episode raises serious questions about the role of official associations in issuing public statements that attribute motives to lawyers for exercising lawful remedies, and whether such conduct aligns with constitutional guarantees, professional ethics, and the supremacy of the judicial process.
The matter is expected to have far-reaching implications for institutional accountability, the independence of the legal profession, and the limits of public commentary by state-linked bodies on pending judicial proceedings, Azhar added.