Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Haryana State Electronics Dev. Vs. C.C.E.

Haryana State Electronics Dev. vs C.C.E.

Type Court Judgment Court Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi Decided Mar 19, 1998
~1 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/13111

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided On
Subject
Miscellaneous

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Miscellaneous

Key legal issue
Miscellaneous

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Haryana State Electronics Dev.

Respondent

C.C.E.

Legal References

Reported In
(1998)(102)ELT607TriDel

Excerpt

1. when the matter was called, none appeared on behalf of the appellants nor is there any request for an adjournment. in the circumstances, the appeal is dismissed for default in appearance in terms of rule 20 of cegat (procedure) rules, 1982.2. later shri j.s. agarwal appeared and requested for restoration of the appeal since he could not appear when the case was called as he was held up in the other bench. in view of the difficulty explained by him, the order is recalled and the appeal is restored to its original number. matter is posted for regular hearing on 22-4-1998.

Full Judgment

1. When the matter was called, none appeared on behalf of the appellants nor is there any request for an adjournment. In the circumstances, the appeal is dismissed for default in appearance in terms of Rule 20 of CEGAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982.

2. Later Shri J.S. Agarwal appeared and requested for restoration of the appeal since he could not appear when the case was called as he was held up in the other Bench. In view of the difficulty explained by him, the order is recalled and the appeal is restored to its original number. Matter is posted for regular hearing on 22-4-1998.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial