would be as to whether the Department could have invoked the extended period of limitation for issuing the show-cause notice and demanding service tax. The assessee had set out the factual background, namely, the nature of activities done by them, namely, the mining activity. It is the consistent case of the assessee that service tax in respect of mining activities was levied for the first time with effect from 1st June, 2007 and therefore they did not apply for registration in respect of mining services before 1st June, 2007. The assessee, therefore, contended that they were under the bonafide belief that the registration need not be taken in respect of the mining services as the services were not taxable prior to 1st June, 2007 and therefore, extended period of limitation cannot be invoked. That apart, the assessee had specifically contended that the Department was not justified in artificially bifurcating the nature of services under various categories, such as, cargo handling service, site formation and clearance service and business auxiliary services and demanding service tax. The assessee by placing reliance on the work orders had established before the Tribunal that the services rendered by them was composite service and the Department was not justified in creating an artificial bifurcation. Furthermore, the assessee’s specific case was that they entered into contracts with different owners of the mines which are composite and inseparable; all the mining contracts specified composite rates for the mining process comprising excavation and haulage of excavated minerals, dumping of
