https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=450288 Operating a heavy water plant and producing heavy water was treated as manufacture because the process yielded a distinct excisable product with a separate name, character and use under Section 2(f) of the Central Excise Act, even though the product attracted nil duty under Chapter 28.45. Service tax could not be levied on the same manufacturing activity merely by classifying it under the proposed service categories. A later show cause notice invoking the extended period under Section 73 of the Finance Act, 1994 was also held time-barred because an earlier notice on the same facts had already put the department on notice. The demand therefore failed on both merits and limitation. en-us Thu, 29 Feb 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 01 Mar 2024 10:07:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=450288 Operating a heavy water plant and producing heavy water was treated as manufacture because the process yielded a distinct excisable product with a separate name, character and use under Section 2(f) of the Central Excise Act, even though the product attracted nil duty under Chapter 28.45. Service tax could not be levied on the same manufacturing activity merely by classifying it under the proposed service categories. A later show cause notice invoking the extended period under Section 73 of the Finance Act, 1994 was also held time-barred because an earlier notice on the same facts had already put the department on notice. The demand therefore failed on both merits and limitation. Case-Laws Service Tax Thu, 29 Feb 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=450288