2025 (10) TMI 247

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ed advocate representing the petitioners is that the Proper Officer despite being obliged in terms of Section 75(4) of the said Act has failed to afford the petitioners an opportunity of being heard. 3. Independent of the aforesaid, it is submitted that the aforesaid issue forming subject matter of the order had previously been taken up by the Bureau of Investigation in a proceeding under Section 67 of the said Act. By a final report dated 30th August, 2021, the above proceedings were concluded. He would submit that admittedly, the petitioners had imported certain goods upon payment of IGST. However, by reasons of the error committed by the petitioners' accountant while claiming ITC, the petitioners had included the claim for IGST and Ce....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 5. Having heard the learned advocates for the respective parties and on considering the materials on record, I find that admittedly in this case, the petitioners were served not only with the pre-show-cause, the show-cause notice was also served. Even thereafter, the Proper Officer had served a further notice upon the petitioners. 6. Notwithstanding the aforesaid, the petitioners had chosen not to respond to the same. However, at the same time, one cannot be lose sight of is the fact that the Bureau of Investigation had already made enquiry in the matter under Section 67 of the said Act and had accepted the explanation given by the petitioners with regard to the availment of ITC/claim of ITC, IGST and Cess under the head "all other ITC....