Nothing to research in a tax law - that's a big statement. I'm an indirect tax practitioner and life would be so good if that's what turns out to be case. For indirect taxes, while we do have a lot of jurisprudence to borrow from historical indirect taxes, a lot of issues are still open in GST. We are still fighting disputes for transitional credit so you can understand the scene. Don't worry, the field is going to be good for next ten years at the very least.

Don't agree to this. There's fair amount of intellectual work. And would definitely want to understand from you what you call as 'real law' because for me any interpretation work is real law. Sometimes the weirdest statements from officer also test your fundamentals and you need to really think before replying. Unless you're focused on liason work for refund processing etc, there's fair amount of interpretation work.

And that intellect helps in reducing the tax burden (i.e., cash outflow) for businesses. Just as any real estate / corporate lawyer would figure how to pay the minimum amount of stamp duty on a transaction. Issues like tax rates for roti vs paratha arise mostly because governments use foolish/dumb arguments to merely increase their tax base (i.e., more revenue for governments) just because they want to and not because they have strong reasons to justify the tax rates. Now if you would just sit back and never challenge dumb taxes, your intellect level isn't as high as you think it is.

Yes. Better ways to waste time like keep on trolling. By any chance, have you fought these litigations or even read these judgments or you are just a garden variety troll who hates indirect taxes, because you never did anything brooms return filing and kissing backsides of officers for getting registrations and refunds?