RAVINDER JUNEJA,DELHI vs. E-ASSESSMENT UNIT, NA

That on the First Appellate Authority has also erred in deciding the case exparte since no notice was received by the party and there was no attempt to communicate through postal channels. 3. That the NFAC First Appellate Authority has decided the matter not on merits but only for non-appearance / or making submissions which is also not in the interest of justice and therefore to be set aside. 4. That the assessee appellant was denied the VC on being asked for an adjournment as the counsel of the appellant was out of station and was not able to attend the VC by the AO despite request having been made. 5. That the documents submitted by the appellant were neither appreciated by the AO and nor by the NFAC / valuated in the justified manner and therefore, the order to be set aside. 6. That the demand of Rs. 45,30,877/- has been made on unjustified grounds. 7. That the denial of capitalization of interest on house is unjustified and denying the deduction on this ground is not justified. 8. That the appellant prays to add, alter or amend any or all the grounds of appeal with her before or after the hearing of appeal. 3. None appeared on behalf of the assessee. 4. Ld. DR has submitted that the assessee is a non -cooperative, he did not participate in the proceedings before the Ld.CIT(A).