https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=391596 An inclusive statutory definition of "railways", read with an exemption notification that does not distinguish between public and private railways, was applied to hold that construction of private railway sidings falls within the railway exemption and is not liable to service tax. On limitation, one demand was treated as time barred because the notice was issued more than two years after the audit objection, while a second demand for a later period was treated as within limitation. The impugned orders were set aside and both appeals were allowed on the basis that the siding work was exempt from service tax. en-us Wed, 08 Jan 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 03 Feb 2020 11:06:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=391596 An inclusive statutory definition of "railways", read with an exemption notification that does not distinguish between public and private railways, was applied to hold that construction of private railway sidings falls within the railway exemption and is not liable to service tax. On limitation, one demand was treated as time barred because the notice was issued more than two years after the audit objection, while a second demand for a later period was treated as within limitation. The impugned orders were set aside and both appeals were allowed on the basis that the siding work was exempt from service tax. Case-Laws Service Tax Wed, 08 Jan 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=391596