https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=751051 CESTAT Chandigarh allowed the appeal, holding that the extended period of limitation could not be invoked as the show cause notice was issued in March 2015 based solely on audit objections from June 2011, without proper investigation or satisfying requirements under Section 11A(4) of Central Excise Act, 1944. The tribunal found that services provided to CPWD and Airport authority constituted works contract services exempt from service tax, not erection/commissioning/installation services as claimed by the department. The demand was barred by limitation and unsustainable on merits. en-us Fri, 05 Apr 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 05 Apr 2024 13:21:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=751051 CESTAT Chandigarh allowed the appeal, holding that the extended period of limitation could not be invoked as the show cause notice was issued in March 2015 based solely on audit objections from June 2011, without proper investigation or satisfying requirements under Section 11A(4) of Central Excise Act, 1944. The tribunal found that services provided to CPWD and Airport authority constituted works contract services exempt from service tax, not erection/commissioning/installation services as claimed by the department. The demand was barred by limitation and unsustainable on merits. Case-Laws Service Tax Fri, 05 Apr 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=751051