Goods and Services Tax

Clubbing multiple GST tax periods in one composite show-cause notice u/ss 73/74 held impermissible; notice quashed
Case-Laws
GST
The dominant issue was whether multiple tax periods/financial years could be clubbed in a single/composite show cause notice under Sections 73/74 of the CGST/KGST Act. Relying on its earlier precedent, the Court held that such clubbing/consolidation/bunching is illegal, invalid, impermissible, and without jurisdiction, being contrary to the CGST/KGST Act; consequently, the composite show cause notice and its addendum were quashed. All consequential communications, the subsequent orders including the order-in-original, and all further proceedings pursuant to the impugned notice were also quashed, and the writ petition was allowed. – HC
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

GST show cause notice for same tax period after earlier DRC-01A: multiple notices allowed if issues differ; writ dismissed
Case-Laws
GST
A taxpayer challenged a GST show cause notice for a tax period on the ground that an earlier intimation in Form GST DRC-01A had already been issued for the same period, contending lack of jurisdiction and invoking res judicata. The Court held that issuance of multiple show cause notices for the same period is not barred where they pertain to different subject matters, and res judicata applies only when an issue has been necessarily decided, including by necessary implication; no such prior adjudication was shown. The writ was dismissed, with liberty to file a reply to the impugned notice within 30 days. – HC
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

GST FY 2024-25 assessment based on wrong show-cause notice section (s.74 vs s.74A) reset for fresh decision
Case-Laws
GST
The dominant issue was whether an assessment framed for FY 2024-2025 pursuant to a show cause notice issued under s.74, instead of the applicable s.74A, was legally sustainable. The Court held that issuance of the notice and consequential assessment under s.74 lacked authority of law where s.74A governed the period; therefore, the assessment order was set aside. To avoid futile remand and limitation complications, the Court directed that the existing notice be treated as a notice under s.74A, required the taxpayer to file a reply on that basis, and ordered adjudication afresh on merits. – HC
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

No genuine public interest in plea to classify air purifiers as medical devices: Centre to Delhi HC
GST
Dated:- 9-1-2026
PTI
New Delhi, Jan 9 (PTI) The Centre on Friday contended before the Delhi High Court that the prayer made in a petition to classify air purifiers as “medical devices” reinforces the inference that the plea is not aimed at addressing any genuine public interest concern but is a “colourable” and “motivated” exercise.
The counsel for the central government submitted before a bench of Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia that classifying air purifiers as medical devices would be counter-productive to the purported objective of the PIL, as it would subject air purifiers to additional regulatory compliances and likely affect their supply in a market already facing constraints.
The court noted that certain averments have been made against the petitioner in the CentreÂ’s affidavit and granted him one week's time to file his rejoinder.

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

tion of air purifiers as medical devices under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act (DCA) and the Medical Devices Rules (MDR), with the evident effect and possible ulterior objective of restricting market participation and conferring regulatory and commercial advantage upon a select few entities holding the requisite licences, registrations and/or approvals. The petition is therefore liable to be dismissed on this ground alone.” The affidavit was filed in response to a PIL matter seeking directions to the Centre to classify air purifiers as “medical devices” and bring them in the GST's 5-per cent slab. Air purifiers are currently taxed at 18 per cent.
The petition filed by advocate Kapil Madan said air purifiers cannot be treated as luxury items in view of the “extreme emergency crisis” caused by severe air pollution in Delhi.
The court had earlier asked the Centre why it cannot reduce the GST rates on air purifiers to make the machines affordable for the common man in view of the worsening

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

he exclusive domain of the GST Council. Judicial intervention directing or influencing such recommendations would not only be constitutionally impermissible but would also undermine the framework of cooperative federalism embedded in Article 279A,” it said.
Earlier, the court had expressed displeasure over authorities doing nothing to remove taxes on air purifiers in this “emergency situation,” when the Air Quality Index (AQI) is “very poor.” The court had taken note of the petitioner's contention that air purifiers qualify as medical devices in terms of a February 2020 notification issued under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act.
The petitioner had further said a GST rate of 5 per cent is charged on medical devices, whereas for air purifiers, the tax rate is 18 per cent. He had sought a direction to the authorities to consider charging 5 per cent GST on air purifiers as well, considering the ever-worsening air condition in Delhi and nearby areas. PTI SKV SKV AMJ AMJ
News – Press relea

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

ASBL Spectra in Financial District Introduces ''No Registration & No GST'' Scheme for Ready-to-Move-in Homes in Hyderabad
GST
Dated:- 9-1-2026
PTI
Hyderabad, Telangana, India (NewsVoir) ASBL Spectra, a premium ready-to-move in gated community in Hyderabad’s Financial District, has announced an innovative homebuying initiative with the launch of its ‘No Registration & No GST’ scheme. The scheme eliminates upfront GST and registration charges for buyers, significantly reducing the immediate financial burden associated with purchasing a ready-to-move-in home.
Located in Financial District, one of HyderabadÂ’s most sought-after residential and commercial hubs, ASBL Spectra is addressing one of the biggest challenges faced by homebu

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

le to arrange large sums of cash upfront, leading to delays or missed opportunities in securing completed homes.
A Restructured Approach to Home Buying Under the ‘No Registration & No GST’ scheme, ASBL Spectra has restructured the purchase process by absorbing GST and registration charges into the overall transaction structure. Instead of requiring buyers to make these payments upfront, the costs are managed through a revised sale deed value, significantly lowering the immediate capital outlay.
With this scheme, buyers can now book a spacious 2,220 sq. ft. premium apartment by paying just ?5 lakhs at the time of booking. The GST and registration components, which traditionally create financial pressure at the entry stage, are no longer

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

ent.
About ASBL Spectra ASBL Spectra is a RERA-approved residential development (P02400003071) spread across approximately 7.85 acres in Financial District, Hyderabad. The project comprises four high-rise towers with G plus 39 floors and features nearly 76 percent open space, offering a balanced environment focused on natural light, ventilation, and privacy.
The gated community offers thoughtfully designed 3 BHK residences with roomsized balconies, catering to families seeking space and comfort without compromising on urban connectivity. ASBL Spectra enjoys direct access from the Outer Ring Road service lane, with Narsingi Junction just 3 minutes away, Gachibowli Circle approximately 7 to 10 minutes away, and Rajiv Gandhi International

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

GST registration suspension over alleged fraudulent input tax credit claims after deemed registration-continued suspension set aside, inquiry continues.
Case-Laws
GST
The dominant issue was whether a suspension order was justified where alleged fraudulent input tax credit was claimed and the GST registration was later cancelled. The Court noted that the taxpayer had obtained deemed registration, a physical inspection report had already been submitted, and a show cause notice had been issued; despite this, ITC was allegedly claimed thereafter. On these facts, the Court held that continued suspension was unwarranted and set aside the suspension order, while clarifying that the authorities could still proceed with and conclude disciplinary proceedings within three months. – HC
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

Excess input tax credit assessment dispute under GST: writ rejected; delayed statutory appeal allowed with 50% cash deposit condition
Case-Laws
GST
Challenge to an assessment alleging excess input tax credit was held not maintainable in writ where the statute provided an efficacious appellate remedy under the GST enactment. The court balanced equities by permitting the taxpayer to pursue the statutory appeal notwithstanding delay, on the condition that 50% of the disputed tax be deposited in cash/electronic cash ledger within 30 days, failing which the revenue could proceed with recovery as if the writ had been dismissed. Petition disposed accordingly – HC
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

GST liability reversal in GSTR-3B 2018-19 and rectified demand dispute remitted for fresh merits review after full deposits
Case-Laws
GST
Challenge to rectification of GST demand where the taxpayer had partly reversed liability in the GSTR-3B for 2018-2019 was addressed by applying the court's consistent approach that the adjudicating authority must reconsider the matter on merits after securing revenue. The matter was remitted for a fresh merits order, subject to the taxpayer depositing 100% of the admitted tax demand in cash (with applicable interest and penalty) and also depositing 100% of the disputed tax amount within 30 days, with any prior cash-ledger debit for the relevant period to be adjusted as pre-deposit on verification – HC
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

Centre opposes in HC plea to reduce GST on air purifiers, says judicial intervention impermissible
GST
Dated:- 8-1-2026
PTI
New Delhi, Jan 8 (PTI) The Centre has opposed in the Delhi High Court a PIL seeking directions to classify air purifiers as “medical devices” and reduce the GST rates on those, saying judicial intervention in matters pertaining to the tax are constitutionally impermissible.
The Centre said it is a settled law that courts do not substitute themselves for constitutionally-designated decision makers, particularly in matters involving economic policy and fiscal structuring.
“Any direction by this court to modify GST rates, convene a meeting of the GST Council or compel the GST Council to consider or adopt a p

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

ab. Air purifiers are currently taxed at 18 per cent.
The petition filed by advocate Kapil Madan said air purifiers cannot be treated as luxury items in view of the “extreme emergency crisis” caused by severe air pollution in Delhi.
The court had earlier asked the Centre why it cannot reduce the GST rates on air purifiers to make the machines affordable for the common man in view of the worsening air quality in the national capital and nearby areas.
It had also directed the GST Council to meet at the earliest and consider lowering or abolishing the tax on air purifiers.
In its affidavit, the Centre said if courts were to issue directions on GST rates or compel specific recommendations, the GST Council would be reduced to a mere rubber s

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

force the inference that the present petition is not aimed at addressing any genuine public interest concern, but is a colourable and motivated exercise of the public interest jurisdiction.
“The reliefs are crafted to secure regulatory classification of air purifiers as medical devices under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act (DCA) and the Medical Devices Rules (MDR), with the evident effect and possible ulterior objective of restricting market participation and conferring regulatory and commercial advantage upon a select few entities holding the requisite licences, registrations and/or approvals. The petition is therefore liable to be dismissed on this ground alone,” the affidavit said.
Earlier, the court had expressed displeasure over authorit

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

Input tax credit on genuine GST invoices when supplier fails to remit tax: Section 16(2)(c) read down, denial set aside
Case-Laws
GST
Section 16(2)(c) CGST Act, requiring that the supplier must have paid tax to enable the purchaser's ITC, was examined where the purchaser had paid GST to the supplier under genuine invoices but the supplier allegedly failed to remit it. The provision was held constitutionally valid, but was read down to avoid disproportionate consequences and arbitrariness under Article 14 by distinguishing bona fide purchasers from collusive or fraudulent transactions. Since there was no allegation of fraud, wilful misstatement, or suppression by the purchaser and recovery mechanisms against the defaulting supplier existed, ITC could not be denied to the bona fide purchaser; the impugned denial order was set aside and the petition partly allowed. – HC
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

Belated GST annual return filings under amnesty: late fee capped at ₹10,000 per Act; no s.125 penalty
Case-Laws
GST
For belated filing of GST annual returns made before the cut-off date under the amnesty notifications, the late fee under s.47 was held to be in the nature of a penal levy, and the notifications issued under s.128 required extension of the capped late fee benefit to all eligible filers; consequently, no late fee could be demanded beyond Rs.10,000 under each GST enactment. Since s.125 general penalty operates only where no specific penalty is otherwise provided, imposition of general penalty alongside the statutory late fee regime was impermissible; consequently, no s.125 penalty could be levied. Petition allowed. – HC
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

Tax demand confirmed after show-cause notice, taxpayer sought more time to reply; order quashed, deposit 25% required.
Case-Laws
GST
The dominant issue was whether confirmation of a tax demand proposed in a show cause notice should be sustained when the taxpayer sought a further opportunity to file a detailed reply with supporting documents. The court held that, consistent with its approach in similar matters, the impugned confirmation order warranted interference to secure a merits-based adjudication; accordingly, it was quashed and the matter remitted for fresh decision, subject to the taxpayer depositing 25% of the disputed tax in cash within 30 days and filing a comprehensive reply, with any existing bank account attachment to stand vacated upon such compliance – HC
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

GST assessment demands based on GSTR-3B/GSTR-2A mismatch and ineligible ITC-orders quashed, remand allowed with 50% deposit
Case-Laws
GST
Where the statutory time limit to file an appeal under s.107 of the GST enactments had expired, the court held that the assessee could still be granted limited writ relief by quashing the assessment orders and remitting the matters for fresh adjudication, consistent with prior practice of conditioning remand on a substantial deposit proportionate to delay. Accordingly, the impugned orders were set aside and the matters remanded, subject to the assessee depositing, in cash through the electronic cash ledger within 30 days, 50% of the disputed tax relating to demands confirmed on account of GSTR-3B/GSTR-2A mismatch and ineligible input tax credit. – HC
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

GST input mismatch in GSTR-2A vs GSTR-3B and unclear notice; s.74 extended period order quashed, remanded after 10% deposit
Case-Laws
GST
Challenge to invocation of the extended period under s.74 of the TNGST Act was considered in light of an unclear show-cause notice and the alleged mismatch between GSTR-2A and GSTR-3B. The court held that proper adjudication on limitation and tax liability required the taxpayer to furnish a comprehensive reply on merits along with legal submissions, which had not been effectively done, warranting a fresh determination. Accordingly, the impugned order was quashed and the matter remitted to the proper officer for reconsideration, subject to deposit of 10% of the disputed tax from the taxpayer's electronic cash ledger within 30 days. – HC
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

ED attaches multi-crore assets in railway freight charge 'fraud' case
GST
Dated:- 7-1-2026
PTI
New Delhi, Jan 7 (PTI) The Enforcement Directorate on Wednesday said it has attached properties worth Rs 2.67 crore as part of a money laundering investigation against a Guwahati-based company and its promoter in a railway freight charges and GST “evasion” case.
A four-storey commercial building and another immovable property located in Gurugram (Haryana) of companies named Vinayak Logistics India, Vinayak Logistics and their owner and director, Pravesh Kabra, have been provisionally attached under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA).
The ED case stems from a chargesheet filed by the CBI in a case where it was alleged tha

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

DGGI arrests two persons for evading over Rs 50 crore GST
GST
Dated:- 7-1-2026
PTI
Hyderabad, Jan 7 (PTI) Two persons have been arrested in connection with separate cases of alleged GST evasion to the tune of Rs 50 crore, officials said on Wednesday.
The Directorate General of GST Intelligence (DGGI), Hyderabad zonal unit, carried out these arrests on January 6 to sustain pressure on the organised tax fraud network, a release said.
“Sunil Kumar, Managing Director of Orange Passenge

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

Composite GST assessment order spanning multiple financial years u/ss 73-74 struck down; fresh year-wise proceedings allowed.
Case-Laws
GST
A composite assessment order covering more than one financial year was challenged as violating Sections 73 and 74 of the GST Act, 2017. Applying binding precedent, it was held that a single show-cause notice or composite assessment order cannot validly relate to more than one tax period-either more than one month where proceedings are initiated before the due date for filing the annual return, or more than one year where the due date has been reached. Consequently, the impugned assessment order and the appellate order affirming it were set aside, with liberty to the department to initiate fresh proceedings separately for each assessment year. – HC
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

Accumulated ITC refund under inverted duty structure: 2019 time-limit amendment held non-retrospective; Section 54 claims revived, remanded.
Case-Laws
GST
Whether the 01.02.2019 amendment curtailing the time for refund applications could retrospectively extinguish accrued entitlement to refund of accumulated ITC under an inverted duty structure was determined by applying the presumption against retrospectivity to substantive curtailment of vested rights; absent express retrospective operation, the unamended “relevant date” continued to govern periods prior to the amendment, and the refund claims were not time-barred, including for July 2017-December 2018 (also within extended time under a notification) and January-March 2019 under Section 54. The rejection for January-March 2019 for alleged non-receipt of eligible inputs was found unreasoned. The impugned order was set aside and the matter remanded for fresh determination. – HC
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

Second-hand motor vehicle dealers u/r 32(5) margin scheme: GST on margin only; ITC allowed for repairs
Case-Laws
GST
Where a registered person trades in second-hand motor vehicles and does not avail ITC on the purchase of such vehicles, GST is payable only on the margin under Rule 32(5) read with N/N 8/2018-CT (Rate). The restriction on ITC applies only to tax paid on purchase of the used vehicles themselves; it does not bar ITC on other inward supplies used in the course or furtherance of business, including repairs, refurbishment, spare parts, and common expenses, subject to Sections 16-21 and Rules 36-45 compliance. Supplies under the margin scheme with nil margin remain taxable (value becomes zero), not exempt, hence no reversal of common ITC under Rules 42/43. – AAR
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

Project management consultancy “centage” charges for government works treated as pure services; GST exemption upheld, refunds limited by Section 54
Case-Laws
GST
Centage charges collected for project management consultancy, involving only supervision, coordination and administrative management without any transfer of property in goods or works contract, were held to constitute “pure services.” As such services were supplied to Government/local authorities in relation to functions entrusted to Panchayats/Municipalities under Articles 243G/243W read with the Eleventh and Twelfth Schedules, they were held exempt under Entry 3 of Notification No. 12/2017-CTR, rendering the centage charges non-taxable under GST. Refund of GST already paid was held to be governed solely by Section 54, requiring filing within two years from the date of tax payment; the authority lacked jurisdiction to relax this limitation. – AAR
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

Dermatology treatment services vs cosmetic hair transplants: therapeutic care exempt under Sl. No. 74, aesthetic procedures taxed
Case-Laws
GST
Healthcare services rendered for diagnosis, treatment, or care of dermatological diseases such as psoriasis, dandruff, dermatitis, fungal infections, folliculitis, and similar ailments were treated as “health care services” and held exempt under Sl. No. 74 of Notification No. 12/2017-Central Tax (Rate), since they are therapeutic services aimed at treating medical conditions; exemption was allowed for such services. Services in the nature of hair transplant/hair fixing or other cosmetic/plastic procedures were held not to qualify for the exemption where undertaken for aesthetic enhancement, and would be exempt only if performed to restore or reconstruct anatomy or bodily functions affected by congenital defect, developmental abnormality, injury, or trauma; exemption was denied for purely cosmetic services. – AAR
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

Manual GSTR-3B filing for March 2021 quarter to claim omitted ITC allowed, without cancelling existing tax demand order
Case-Laws
GST
Whether a registered person could be permitted to file a manual GSTR-3B for the quarter ending March 2021 to claim additional ITC omitted due to an error was determined by balancing procedural facilitation with preservation of existing tax demands. The court accepted that allowing manual filing would not, by itself, nullify or dilute the demand raised under the order dated 19.02.2025, which would continue to operate subject to any permissible challenge before the competent authority. Accordingly, the respondents were directed to accept the manual return, without automatic impact on the demand order, and the petition was disposed of. – HC
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

Seized silver and cash stolen in state custody: compensation awarded for negligent loss; relief limited to undisputed shortfall
Case-Laws
GST
Compensation was sought for loss of seized silver and cash stolen from a police station while in State custody. The seizure was an exercise of sovereign power, but the subsequent loss was attributable to negligence of public officials, amounting to a constitutional tort infringing the claimant's right to carry on trade under Article 19(1)(g); compensation was therefore maintainable and granted. On quantification, the forum declined to adjudicate disputed purity of returned silver for lack of material, and confined relief to the undisputed shortfall between seized and returned quantities. The claimant was held entitled to return of 23.44 kg silver valued as on the date of compliance, with Rs. 7,95,000 adjusted against that value; petition allowed. – HC
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

Provisional tax attachment on GST property u/s 83: one-year limit enforced, attachment lapsed and cannot be renewed.
Case-Laws
GST
Provisional attachment under Section 83 of the CGST/KGST Act was challenged as time-barred. The court held that Section 83 expressly limits the attachment's operation to one year, and on expiry the attachment and all consequential proceedings and notices cease to have effect; accordingly, the impugned attachment was declared non-subsisting due to lapse of the statutory period. Relying on binding precedent, it further held that after expiry of the one-year period, the Revenue is precluded from re-invoking Section 83 to issue a fresh or new provisional attachment in respect of the same matter. Petition was disposed with directions. – HC
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =

GST tax demand with interest and penalty decided without show-cause reply; taxpayer given another chance, orders set aside.
Case-Laws
GST
Challenge to confirmation of GST tax demand with interest and penalty on the ground that the adjudication proceeded without a reply to the show-cause notice. The court held that where the taxpayer asserted bona fide and unavoidable reasons constituting sufficient cause for not filing a reply, a justice-oriented approach warranted one further opportunity to contest on merits; accordingly, the adjudication order under s.73 and the appellate order under s.107 were set aside and the matter was remitted for fresh consideration from the stage of filing reply to the show-cause notice, subject to payment of costs to the Legal Services Authority. – HC
TMI Updates – Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts

= = = = = = = =

Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source

= = = = = = = =