Austin Nichols & Co. v. United States

U.S. Customs Court

Austin Nichols & Co. v. United States

28 Cust. Ct. 360, 1952 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 66

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Austin Nichols & Co. v. United States. Read the opinion of the Court — 22 Cust. Ct. 33 →

United States Customs Court·Decided January 3, 1952·No. No. 56226; protests 174729-K, etc. (New York)·Published

Opinion

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

At the trial it was stipulated that the facts and issues herein are similar in all material respects to those involved in United States v. Browne Vintners Co., Inc. (34 C. C. P. A. 112, C. A. D. 351) and that the quantities reported by the inspector as manifested not found were not in fact received by the importers. In accordance with stipulation of counsel and following the decision cited it was hold that duty and internal revenue tax are not assessable upon such portions of the merchandise as were reported by the inspector as manifested not found. The protests were sustained to this extent.

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

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

At the trial it was stipulated that the facts and issues herein are similar in all material respects to those involved in United States v. Browne Vintners Co., Inc. (34 C. C. P. A. 112, C. A. D. 351) and that the quantities reported by the inspector as manifested not found were not in fact received by the importers. In accordance with stipulation of counsel and following the decision cited it was hold that duty and internal revenue tax are not assessable upon such portions of the merchandise as were reported by the inspector as manifested not found. The protests were sustained to this extent.

Austin Nichols & Co. v. United States, 28 Cust. Ct. 360, 1952 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 66 (cusc 1952).

Pincite

28 Cust. Ct. 360 (Austin Nichols & Co. v. United States) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.