https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=76240 Treated water cleared to vending machine outlets was held not marketable as a distinct commodity, so the deeming provision in Chapter 22 could not treat the purification process as manufacture for central excise purposes. The department had not shown by evidence that the water was sold to consumers or otherwise marketed, and the purification and filtration merely improved quality without changing the nature or composition of the water. The reference to canisters bearing the name "cococola" was treated as a house mark for identification and did not make the water marketable under that brand. As the duty demand failed, the consequential interest and penalties were also unsustainable. en-us Mon, 29 Jun 2009 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 17 Jun 2010 00:00:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=76240 Treated water cleared to vending machine outlets was held not marketable as a distinct commodity, so the deeming provision in Chapter 22 could not treat the purification process as manufacture for central excise purposes. The department had not shown by evidence that the water was sold to consumers or otherwise marketed, and the purification and filtration merely improved quality without changing the nature or composition of the water. The reference to canisters bearing the name "cococola" was treated as a house mark for identification and did not make the water marketable under that brand. As the duty demand failed, the consequential interest and penalties were also unsustainable. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 29 Jun 2009 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=76240