Judgment ( 1. ) THIS is an income-tax reference made at the instance of the assessee under Section 256 (1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, by the Tribunal in R. A. Nos. 205 to 208/ind of 1990 which arises out of an order dated July 21, 1990, passed in I. T. A. Nos. 1077 to 1080/ind of 1985 to answer the following question of law by this court : "whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, and the material on record the said Tribunal was correct in law in reversing the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) dated August 12, 1985, and restoring the order of the Income-tax Officer dated September 21, 1984, under Section 154 ?" ( 2. ) AT the outset we may mention that despite notices sent by this court including even SPC to the assessee none has appeared for the assessee in this reference on any date of hearing. In fact, even on the last date of hearing despite SPC having been sent, none appeared to make any submissions on behalf of the assessee. In this view of the matter, we are left with no option except to decline to answer the question referred to this court by the Tribunal at the instance of the assessee. When the assessee herself is not interested in inviting any finding on the question referred at her instance and does not appear on any dates of hearing in the last more than six years, we do not consider this reference to be a fit one to answer on the merits in the absence of the assessee. That apart, we find from the statement of case drawn by the Tribunal that though the statement of case makes a reference to annexures as E, F, G, H and I none of these annexures are no record. These annexures are orders of the Assessing Officer, the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) and the Tribunal. In the absence of copies of these orders being actually annexed along with the statement of case (though referred to in the statement), we do not have any opportunity to read any of these orders. We cannot examine the question referred only on the basis of some paras being mentioned in the statement of case from these orders. In the absence of copies of these orders being actually annexed along with the statement of case (though referred to in the statement), we do not have any opportunity to read any of these orders. We cannot examine the question referred only on the basis of some paras being mentioned in the statement of case from these orders. In order to appreciate the question in its right perspective, we must have on record the full order of all taxing authorities passed from time to time as true copies. ( 3. ) IN view of the aforementioned two infirmities, we decline to answer the question referred to us by the Tribunal.