Safari Retreats - SC opens the P-AND-OR-A box

respected supreme court initially in the safari judgement has said the brevity is the soul of advocacy and fired the filers and the arguers for plethora of papers submissions and itself gave the undecided decision in 91 pages out of which 20 is reproduction of law facts and 30pages of income tax decisions which are not clear whether relied or not.
so discussion on the matters and submissions is only38-40 pages. so cort did the same thing which it highly objected. court also did three typing errors and kept on repeating the words or the lines consecutively. so court was also not was very demanding and ended with remanding. this is all like a namkeen rasogulla. court says some of our conclusions at para 65starting . so where are or which are the other conclusions and why not mentioned in the summary which is normally the operative part. shall we consider that decision starts from para 32 itself. some times it writes clause 5 and some times clause 5(b). this is really strange. you rightly mentioned that anand theatres should have been overruled.because it is not a good law now. it could have been done so because the court has reversed the seven member bench judgement in case of royalty , which logically and legitimately prevailed over twenty years. nine is above seven and three is above two member is a theory which is not expected to be followed by such judiciary. it is not clear from the concluding para of the judgement that whether on his own account route will save the taxpayer from denial of input tax credit or functionality test is required in each and every case.

Navin Khandelwal 15/11/2024