C. J. Van Houten & Zoon, Inc. v. United States

U.S. Customs Court

C. J. Van Houten & Zoon, Inc. v. United States

36 Cust. Ct. 408

CourtUnited States Customs Court

DecidedApril 20, 1956

DocketNo. 59865; petition 7205-R (New York)

StatusPublished

This text of 36 Cust. Ct. 408 (C. J. Van Houten & Zoon, Inc. 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

C. J. Van Houten & Zoon, Inc. v. United States, 36 Cust. Ct. 408 (cusc 1956).

Pincite

Opinion

Opinion by

Ford, J.

At the trial, petitioner’s witness testified that, some time prior to the date of entry, petitioner was informed by the customs officials that the appraiser would not accept the prices shown on the invoices; that it was the appraiser’s intention to appraise the merchandise on the basis of foreign value; that the petitioner disagreed; and that one entry was selected as a test case and an appeal to reappraisement was filed, which resulted in a reduction of the value found by the appraiser, but which also left the appraised value higher than the entered value. Upon the record presented, it was held that there was no intent to defraud the revenue of the United States or to conceal or misrepresent the facts of the case or to deceive the appraiser as to the value of the merchandise. The petition was, therefore, granted. P. Pastene & Co. (Inc.) v. United States (21 C. C. P A. 69, T. D. 46392) followed.

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

Opinion by

Ford, J.

At the trial, petitioner’s witness testified that, some time prior to the date of entry, petitioner was informed by the customs officials that the appraiser would not accept the prices shown on the invoices; that it was the appraiser’s intention to appraise the merchandise on the basis of foreign value; that the petitioner disagreed; and that one entry was selected as a test case and an appeal to reappraisement was filed, which resulted in a reduction of the value found by the appraiser, but which also left the appraised value higher than the entered value. Upon the record presented, it was held that there was no intent to defraud the revenue of the United States or to conceal or misrepresent the facts of the case or to deceive the appraiser as to the value of the merchandise. The petition was, therefore, granted. P. Pastene & Co. (Inc.) v. United States (21 C. C. P A. 69, T. D. 46392) followed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

36 Cust. Ct. 408, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/c-j-van-houten-zoon-inc-v-united-states-cusc-1956.