ORDER : 1. The petitioner is aggrieved by the respondent's ex parte order dated 18.02.2022 (Annexure-Q) under Section 73(1) of the Finance Act, 1994. Sri. M.N. Shankare Gowda, the learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that the petitioner wound up his business in the year 2017 to relocate to United States, and because he relocated and closed the business, he did not have regular access to the business premises. His only visits to India from the year 2017 to the date when he learnt about the impugned order were when he had to visit India to attend to his ailing parents and on the demise of his late father. 2. Sri. M.N. Shankare Gowda submits that the petitioner is bonafide in setting forth the reasons for failure to respond to the Show Cause Notices issued and therefore, this Court must extend an opportunity to the petitioner to appear before the respondent and show cause against demands as finalized in the impugned order. Sri. Aravind V. Chavan, the learned counsel for the respondent, while not controverting the circumstances canvassed, submits that the petitioner is under a statutory obligation to inform the change in address even if he had to relocate and having failed to inform the authorities, he cannot complain about lack of opportunity. 3. These submissions are considered, and it is observed that the respondents do not seriously contest the reasons assigned by the petitioner. This Court is of the considered view that for complete and effective determination of the liability, the petitioner, who pleads bonafides, must have an opportunity but subject to all just exceptions in law. Hence, the petition is allowed in part and the impugned order dated 18.02.2022 (Annexure-Q) is quashed restoring the proceedings to the respondent for reconsideration for extending an opportunity to the petitioner and the petitioner to avail such opportunity shall appear without further notice before the respondent on 19.04.2023.