China Art Goods Co. v. United States

U.S. Customs Court

China Art Goods Co. v. United States

54 Cust. Ct. 449, 1965 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 1874

CourtUnited States Customs Court

DecidedJune 7, 1965

DocketNo. 69353; protest 61/16435 (Los Angeles)

StatusPublished

This text of 54 Cust. Ct. 449 (China Art Goods Co. 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

China Art Goods Co. v. United States, 54 Cust. Ct. 449, 1965 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 1874 (cusc 1965).

Pincite

Opinion

Opinion by

Wilson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the items marked “D” consist of trays, serving trays, snack trays, display trees, etc., not in part of rattan, similar in all material respects to those the subject of Abstract 66729, the claim at 16% percent under the provision in paragraph 412, as modified by the Annecy Protocol to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (T.D. 52373), supplemented by Presidential proclamation (T.D. 52476), for manufactures of wood was sustained. The items marked “E,” stipulated to consist of items of furniture other than chairs, in chief value of wood, were held dutiable at 10% percent under the provision in said paragraph 412, as modified by T.D. 54108, for furniture other than chairs, in chief value of wood, as claimed.

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

Opinion by

Wilson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the items marked “D” consist of trays, serving trays, snack trays, display trees, etc., not in part of rattan, similar in all material respects to those the subject of Abstract 66729, the claim at 16% percent under the provision in paragraph 412, as modified by the Annecy Protocol to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (T.D. 52373), supplemented by Presidential proclamation (T.D. 52476), for manufactures of wood was sustained. The items marked “E,” stipulated to consist of items of furniture other than chairs, in chief value of wood, were held dutiable at 10% percent under the provision in said paragraph 412, as modified by T.D. 54108, for furniture other than chairs, in chief value of wood, as claimed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

54 Cust. Ct. 449, 1965 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 1874, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/china-art-goods-co-v-united-states-cusc-1965.