We want LI to be one of the friendliest places on the internet, where lawyers and law students help each other with their career related queries and occasionally discuss other stuff that might affect their lives too. In other words:
1. Be kind, respectful and helpful to each other.
2. Be bona fide, truthful, genuine and curious.
3. Assume the best intention of others.
Therefore, in using the site, you must agree to do your best to uphold these community guidelines.
Note that what you find here is written and moderated by anonymous people on the internet.
Therefore everything you read here is very likely unverified, rumour, speculation and/or downright false.
In continuing to read anything here, you must therefore agree not to take anything you read here as factual and that you will exercise due caution, diligence and common sense before acting on any information you may come across here.
You also agree to report any inaccurate or malicious comments with the buttons. Moderators take action within 24 hours, as required and appropriate under law.
Our full terms and conditions apply too.
Do you solemnly agree to all of the above?
Also the comment about people leaving is five months old, when so many associates left one after the other. No offence, but if you don't know about the work culture (▮▮▮ ) or the fact that so many people left last year, I have to doubt whether your comment is genuine or whether it's posted by one of the partners anonymously. Again, no offence.
Reply to this with a throw-away email ID and we can connect.
And yet the usual response is that you are paid for this, or that you chose this path. But sometimes I find myself wondering if I really chose all of it in the way it turned out....
That's how
It reminds me that the only thing standing between justice and injustice is my corporate law firm.
Sure there's pressure to make targets and build your own book. In a Tier 1 firm like the one i work with there's generally enough work going around for you to make targets and the actual execution work is mostly done by the associates again.
If you have/build a good team (which is the real clincher honestly) and are generally competent, clients will keep coming back to you and the book gets built.
You have more flexibility with respect to work hours and the ability to take time off to be there for your kids and weekends are more free.
Honestly, law firms are pyramids and it's worst at the bottom. Salaried partner is like the second or third highest rung of the pyramid (depending on whether you're at a promoter run firm or not) and it's amongst the best places to be in a law firm, honestly.
Whether my msc study period will be counted as a gap year in my practice and do I need to get my license suspended?
Note: I will be linking my prospective msc thesis with law.
------
If you’re a self-employed lawyer (professional income) earning ₹17 lakh/year, your tax depends heavily on how smartly you use deductions and schemes. Let’s walk through a realistic “maximum tax saving” scenario for FY 2025–26 (AY 2026–27).
🧾 Step 1: Use Presumptive Taxation (Best Option for Lawyers)
As a lawyer, you can use Section 44ADA:
Declare 50% of income as profit
Remaining 50% treated as expenses (no proof needed)
👉 So:
Gross income = ₹17,00,000
Taxable profit = ₹8,50,000
💸 Step 2: Apply Maximum Deductions
Now reduce ₹8.5L further:
Common + High-impact deductions:
80C (PPF, ELSS, LIC, etc.) → ₹1,50,000
80D (Health insurance) → ₹25,000
NPS (80CCD(1B)) → ₹50,000
Standard business expenses (already covered in 44ADA) → no need separately
👉 New taxable income: ₹8,50,000 – ₹2,25,000 = ₹6,25,000
🧮 Step 3: Tax Calculation (Old Regime – best for deductions)
Slab:
0–2.5L → 0
2.5–5L → 5% = ₹12,500
5–6.25L → 20% = ₹25,000
👉 Total tax = ₹37,500
🎯 Step 4: Apply Rebate (Section 87A)
Rebate applies if income ≤ ₹5 lakh → ❌ NOT applicable here
➕ Step 5: Add Cess
4% cess = ₹1,500
👉 Final Tax ≈ ₹39,000
🟢 Final Answer (Optimized Scenario)
👉 You pay ~₹39,000 tax on ₹17 lakh income
Both SG Tushar Mehta and ASG Aishwarya Bhati have been regularly opposing abortions for minor rape victims and for minor unwanted pregnancies. They have been calling it murder. While abortion must be considered carefully, Tushar Mehta and Aishwarya Bhati's approach is incorrect and imposes their ideological views on minor rape victims who are forced to complete pregnancies, deliver babies, and hand them over for adoption. Justice Nagarathna in this case asked the right questions on 24 April 2026.
Update - So Justice Nagarathna allowed the abortion. That is the right decision in case of a minor rape victim.
I recall a case before Delhi High Court Chief Justice Upadhyaya and Justice Anish Dayal in July/ August 2025. A minor rape victim wanted to abort. The Court was initially inclined to allow and doctors initially agreed.
ASG Aishwarya Bhati intervened, and a revised medial report was filed by the doctors stating that abortion would involve two procedures, first to deliver child, and second to kill it. And the Court was encouraged to call this murder. The Chief Justice questioned the Petitioner's Counsel saying she was asking them to direct murder. The result was that the abortion was denied. And the minor was offered free medical support for 5 years including for her psychological welfare. While the case was being heard, the minor was essentially in police custody in hospital, to prevent any unauthorised abortion. The High Court decision in that case failed the minor rape victim. Forcing a rape victim to deliver a child is unconstitutional and violative of her human rights. And compelling an adoption of an unwanted rape conceived child by a minor has its own life long trauma. Aishwarya Bhati also got the doctors to say that the abortion posed medical risks to the minor as it could potentially cause life long damage to reproductive abilities. The doctors were never asked to state that these risks were minor. Am glad that Justice Nagarathna has clarified the law.
Thank you for your second para. It's not as of BCL or LLM had not crossed my mind. But many are saying LLMs are useless for non academia jobs. And that BCL is primarily depended on your UG grade, which brings me back on square zero
I don't understand why do you feel I am narcissistic. Mentioning that my 12th grades meets the grade equivalencey criteria of UK University is not narcissism. It's merely a fact. I never said that I am automatically qualified to be admitted there, because there are other factors like EC, SOP, LOR, etc
Firstly, you say you'd wish to do the LLB for a job at a Magic Circle or SC firm, as a solicitor, when the UK has no requirement of having an undergraduate degree in law to be eligible for those and just require the SQE. Why do you believe that having an LLB from India and adding another LLB from a UK university would make you more attractive when these firms look for things more than just bare legal knowledge?
Secondly, if you wish to experience excellent pedagogy, an LLM/BCL/Other specialized masters degree like the Oxford Masters in Law & Finance should appeal to you. You'd be building upon the foundations you already have of the law, instead of re-learning it. A masters degree would mean meaningful progression for you, as well as you getting to experience the academic prowess of apparently superior universities in a more meaningful way than you would with a second LLB.
Overall, a Macbook will likely last you longer than a Windows machine, so the need to upgrade frequently is substantially reduced.
If yes whats the experience like?
If yes what was the experience like