Dana Perfumes Corp. v. United States

U.S. Customs Court

Dana Perfumes Corp. v. United States

61 Cust. Ct. 678, 1968 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 1693

United States Customs Court·Decided November 7, 1968·No. No. R68/40; reappraisements R68/10251 and R68/11477 (New York)·Published

Opinion

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise and issues are similar in all material respects to those involved in Gehrig Hoban & Co., Inc. v. United, States (57 Cust. Ct. 727, A.R.D. 210), the court found and held that cost of production, as that value is defined in section 402a(f), Tariff Act of 1980, as amended by the Customs Simplification Act of 1956, is the proper basis for the determination of the value of the “Canoe” cologne here involved and that such value per bottle of the involved merchandise is as stated in schedule “B,” said schedule “B” being attached to and made a part of the decision, plus the pro rata share of the cost of packing as indicated on the invoices.

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

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise and issues are similar in all material respects to those involved in Gehrig Hoban & Co., Inc. v. United, States (57 Cust. Ct. 727, A.R.D. 210), the court found and held that cost of production, as that value is defined in section 402a(f), Tariff Act of 1980, as amended by the Customs Simplification Act of 1956, is the proper basis for the determination of the value of the “Canoe” cologne here involved and that such value per bottle of the involved merchandise is as stated in schedule “B,” said schedule “B” being attached to and made a part of the decision, plus the pro rata share of the cost of packing as indicated on the invoices.

Dana Perfumes Corp. v. United States, 61 Cust. Ct. 678, 1968 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 1693 (cusc 1968).

Pincite

61 Cust. Ct. 678 (Dana Perfumes Corp. v. United States) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related