https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=162495 Stay was sought against a Commissioner (Appeals) finding that a vehicle had not been used as a tourist vehicle under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 read with rule 128 of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989. The record did not at that stage show that the vehicle had been constructed in the manner required for a tourist vehicle, and no prima facie material supported the Revenue's case. Relying on an earlier Division Bench view, the Tribunal found no sufficient ground to stay the appellate order, and the stay application was refused. en-us Fri, 02 Jun 2006 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 28 Feb 2014 13:09:58 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=162495 Stay was sought against a Commissioner (Appeals) finding that a vehicle had not been used as a tourist vehicle under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 read with rule 128 of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989. The record did not at that stage show that the vehicle had been constructed in the manner required for a tourist vehicle, and no prima facie material supported the Revenue's case. Relying on an earlier Division Bench view, the Tribunal found no sufficient ground to stay the appellate order, and the stay application was refused. Case-Laws Service Tax Fri, 02 Jun 2006 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=162495