ORDER
S.S. Sekhon, Member (T)
1. The issue involved in this appeal is the classification of two items (i) ‘Frizbees’, and (ii) ‘Plastic Ball pen stands’.
2. After hearing both sides, and considering the material on record, it is found that:
a) ‘Frizbee’ is a proprietary name for a concave plastic disc which spins when thrown into the air and is used in catching game. The object of the game is simply for one player to toss the Frisbee, or disk, into the air and try to keep it from his opponent’s grasp. Frisbees are plastic dishes which perform all manner of gyrations when tossed in the air. The frizbee is a plastic disc about the size of a frying pan that in the hands of the experts boomerangs; as per Oxford English Dictionary Second Edition Volume VI published in 1989, relied upon by the appellants. Considering this aspect of the product under dispute and that Heading 95.06 covers other articles and equipments including ‘boomerangs” as per the HSN Notes, which is para materia 950% of Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985, we find no hesitation in approving that heading for classification of “frizbee”. After going through the HSN Notes for toys we do not agree the entity in question to be understood as a toy covered under heading 95.03. The claim of the appellant under heading 95.03 which is for toys is therefore rejected.
b) As regards the classification of the entity ‘plastic ballpoint pen stand’, the lower authorities appear to have classified it under heading 96.08.00, on the ground that the HSN Notes under Heading 96.08 talk about ‘pen holders’, whether or not in one piece and with or without nibs or caps covered under that heading. From the photograph of the entity in question and the understanding of a ‘pen holder’ as given in the Oxford English Dictionary which reads:
“A holder for a (steel or other) pen, consisting of a cylindrical rod of wood, ivory, metal or other material, with a metal barrel or other device at the end into which a pen or ‘nib’ may be fixed; the pen and penholder together forming a writing instrument or ‘pen’ of which the penholder forms the handle.”
We find that a ballpoint penstand cannot have & does not have a nib and therefore the entity cannot be holder for a nib as a penholder is understood. The entity is for placing a stand for a ballpoint pens and would be covered under Heading 3926.90 as claimed by the appellants.
3. The appeal is disposed of by confirming classification of ‘frizbees’ under heading 95.06 and plastic ballpoint pen stand under heading 3926.90 accordingly.
(Pronounced in Court)
