ORDER
G.A. Brahma Deva, Member (J)
1. When the matter was called, none appeared on behalf of the appellants. However, there was a request from them to decide the case on merits. Accordingly, we proceed to pass this order after hearing Shri A.M. Tilak, learned JDR.
2. The dispute is in respect of classification of rocking chairs and baby chairs manufactured by the appellants.
3. Whether the above items are classifiable under Heading 9503 as claimed by the party or under 9401 as per the department is an issue to be considered in this appeal. According to assessee the items are primarily used for the entertainment of babies and classifiable under Heading 95. The Assistant Collector while classifying under Chapter 94 observed that toys of all kinds and other goods specified therein are classifiable under Heading 95 and the rocking chair was not covered by any of the description of the toys in the explanatory notes and could not consider under Heading 9401.00 furniture was more appropriate and covered chairs including furniture.
4. Both the authorities below observe that for something to be classified as a toy, it must be capable of providing amusement. It is not clear how an ordinary chair in which an infant could sit can provide any amusement and can be qualified for it to be called as toy. Further, the Assistant Collector has observed that furniture fails to be classified under Chapter 94 and that the explanatory notes to the HSN specifically refer to infant’s chair and at page 1575 of Volume 4 as furniture. The explanatory notes have persuasive effect even if they are not binding.
5. Considering the fact that the goods are chair of a size specially intended for infants and in the absence of anything to show that they have any device capable of providing amusement, they must be classified as chairs. According to party the items are designed to produce amusement but no evidence has been placed on record to substantiate that they are designed to produce amusement only. On the other hand the lower authorities have considered the issue with reference to the explanatory notes of HSN and since the items are appropriately covered under the category of furniture they are to be classified under Chapter 94. The view of the authorities below seems to be correct. In the facts and circumstances with reference to the facts, we do not find any infirmity in the impugned order. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.