Per Justice K.K. Usha : The question referred for consideration by the Larger Bench is whether Commissioner (Appeals) does have jurisdiction to remand the appeal before him after the amendment to Section 35-A by the Finance Act, 2001 w.e.f. 11.5.2001. Reference was necessitated in view of difference of opinion between two Benches of this Tribunal on the issue. A learned Single Member of East Regional Bench took the view in CCE Customs Bhubaneshwar Vs. Indian Aluminium Co. 2002 (50) RLT 92 that even after the amendment the Commissioner (Appeals) has inherent power to remand the matter to the original adjudicating authority for de novo consideration. The Referring Bench agreed with the above view. But it was noted that a Division Bench of Bombay Bench of this Tribunal has taken a different view in Vipor Chemicals Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs, Mumbai 2002 (52) RLT 105 (CEGAT)=2002 (144) ELT 385. It was held therein that after the amendment w.e.f. 11.5.2001 the Commissioner (Appeals) will have no power of remand.

2. In CCE Customs, Bhubaneshwar Vs. Indian Aluminium Co. learned Single Member had placed reliance on two decisions of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in M/s. T