https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=124 A prima facie plea that the appellant was not a tour operator was accepted, where he claimed only to have booked seats on tours run by others and to have no vehicle, tourist permit, or Motor Vehicles Act registration. The relevant statutory definition of tour operation, as noted, turned on holding a tourist permit, and the record did not show any finding that such a permit existed. On that basis, the insistence on pre-deposit was not justified. The pre-deposit requirement was set aside and the appeal was remitted for decision on merits in accordance with law. en-us Thu, 30 Oct 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 03 Jul 2008 17:43:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=124 A prima facie plea that the appellant was not a tour operator was accepted, where he claimed only to have booked seats on tours run by others and to have no vehicle, tourist permit, or Motor Vehicles Act registration. The relevant statutory definition of tour operation, as noted, turned on holding a tourist permit, and the record did not show any finding that such a permit existed. On that basis, the insistence on pre-deposit was not justified. The pre-deposit requirement was set aside and the appeal was remitted for decision on merits in accordance with law. Case-Laws Service Tax Thu, 30 Oct 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=124