Bio Amla Shampoo has officially clarified its legal standing after being wrongly linked to a tax evasion case involving a separate company. The Lahore High Court (LHC) has now restrained authorities from taking any adverse action against the legitimate trademark holder.
The brand’s current owners, operating under an Association of Persons (AOP) registered in Peshawar, said they have no connection with Forvil Cosmetics Pvt. Ltd., the company that previously faced Federal Board of Revenue (FBR) tax proceedings in 2017–18.
How the Confusion Began
Bio Amla has been a popular household brand since the 1980s, originally operated as a family business. In 2013, the family split operations:
Zakauddin Sheikh formed Forvil Cosmetics Pvt. Ltd. and owned the basic Bio Amla wordmark (Trademark No. 87611).
The remaining family continued under the Forvil Cosmetics AOP, holding a distinct trademark for Bio Amla Shampoo with full label design (Trademark No. 344316).
When Mr. Sheikh’s company faced tax evasion cases and asset seizures, the FBR mistakenly linked the issue to the unrelated AOP firm.
FBR & PSQCA Missteps
In 2023, due to this misidentification, FBR advised the Pakistan Standards & Quality Control Authority (PSQCA) to revoke all Bio Amla licenses.
The AOP firm, which had valid PSQCA licenses since 2016, lost its approvals despite having no legal involvement in the tax case.
The firm approached the Federal Tax Ombudsman (FTO), which ruled in their favor. In May 2024, FBR issued a clearance letter confirming no recoveries or legal issues against the AOP firm.
However, confusion resurfaced when FBR again referred the matter back to PSQCA, resulting in yet another license cancellation.
Court Steps In
The AOP firm filed a writ petition in the Lahore High Court, asserting its independence from the defunct private limited company.
The LHC issued notices to FBR and PSQCA, and granted a restraining order preventing further adverse actions until the matter is fully resolved.
The firm has urged authorities and media outlets to accurately distinguish between the two legally separate entities to avoid further commercial and reputational harm.
