Chambers v. United States

U.S. Customs Court

Chambers v. United States

23 Cust. Ct. 120, 1949 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 676

CourtUnited States Customs Court

DecidedJune 23, 1949

DocketNo. 53339; petition 6572-R (Laredo)

StatusPublished

This text of 23 Cust. Ct. 120 (Chambers 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

Chambers v. United States, 23 Cust. Ct. 120, 1949 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 676 (cusc 1949).

Pincite

Opinion

Opinion by

Ekwall, J.

Petitioner’s customhouse broker testified that prior to making entry, he had requested information from the Government appraiser as to whether there was a higher value, but the appraiser accepted his entered value. 'Subsequently, the collector filed appeal from the appraiser’s finding and the broker entered into a stipulation agreeing to the advance. He then attempted to .amend his entry but the amendment was too late. From the evidence it was held that the petitioner complied with the terms of section 489 in that he produced satisfactory evidence that the undervaluation of the merchandise was made without intent to defraud the Government or its officials and that he did not intend to withhold any information from the customs officials. The petition was therefore granted.

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

Opinion by

Ekwall, J.

Petitioner’s customhouse broker testified that prior to making entry, he had requested information from the Government appraiser as to whether there was a higher value, but the appraiser accepted his entered value. 'Subsequently, the collector filed appeal from the appraiser’s finding and the broker entered into a stipulation agreeing to the advance. He then attempted to .amend his entry but the amendment was too late. From the evidence it was held that the petitioner complied with the terms of section 489 in that he produced satisfactory evidence that the undervaluation of the merchandise was made without intent to defraud the Government or its officials and that he did not intend to withhold any information from the customs officials. The petition was therefore granted.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

23 Cust. Ct. 120, 1949 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 676, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/chambers-v-united-states-cusc-1949.