Amtorg Trading Corp. v. United States

U.S. Customs Court

Amtorg Trading Corp. v. United States

37 Cust. Ct. 395

CourtUnited States Customs Court

DecidedOctober 11, 1956

DocketNo. 60285; protest 257910-K (New York)

StatusPublished

This text of 37 Cust. Ct. 395 (Amtorg Trading Corp. v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States Customs Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Amtorg Trading Corp. v. United States, 37 Cust. Ct. 395 (cusc 1956).

Pincite

Opinion

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

It was stipulated that the facts and issues herein are similar to those involved in United States v. Browne Vintners & Co., Inc. (34 C. C. P. A. 112, C. A. D. 351); that the quantities reported by the inspector as manifested, not found, were not in fact received by the importer; that the inspector reported “34 bales manifested not found”; that, on liquidation of the entry, no duty was assessed on 17 of the 34 bales; and that duty was assessed on the remaining 17 bales. In accordance with stipulation of counsel and following the decision cited it was held that duty is not assessable upon any of the merchandise which was reported by the inspector as manifested, but not found, including the 17 bales of tobacco upon which duty was assessed. The protest was sustained to this extent.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

It was stipulated that the facts and issues herein are similar to those involved in United States v. Browne Vintners & Co., Inc. (34 C. C. P. A. 112, C. A. D. 351); that the quantities reported by the inspector as manifested, not found, were not in fact received by the importer; that the inspector reported “34 bales manifested not found”; that, on liquidation of the entry, no duty was assessed on 17 of the 34 bales; and that duty was assessed on the remaining 17 bales. In accordance with stipulation of counsel and following the decision cited it was held that duty is not assessable upon any of the merchandise which was reported by the inspector as manifested, but not found, including the 17 bales of tobacco upon which duty was assessed. The protest was sustained to this extent.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

37 Cust. Ct. 395, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/amtorg-trading-corp-v-united-states-cusc-1956.