https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=107109 The product was treated as a water filter because its function was found, on factual examination, to be filtration of water. The incidental removal of suspended matter and bacteria through that filtration did not create a separate purifying process, so the apparatus remained within the class of water filters. On that basis, the exemption under the relevant central excise notification was attracted, and the corresponding later notification supported the same treatment. en-us Tue, 12 Nov 2002 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 17 Mar 2012 16:50:53 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=107109 The product was treated as a water filter because its function was found, on factual examination, to be filtration of water. The incidental removal of suspended matter and bacteria through that filtration did not create a separate purifying process, so the apparatus remained within the class of water filters. On that basis, the exemption under the relevant central excise notification was attracted, and the corresponding later notification supported the same treatment. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 12 Nov 2002 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=107109