Dato Hosiery Co. v. United States

U.S. Customs Court

Dato Hosiery Co. v. United States

46 Cust. Ct. 348

United States Customs Court·Decided February 21, 1961·No. No. 65187; protests 236917-K, etc. (Philadelphia)·Published

Opinion

Opinion by

Ford, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise is similar in use to thrown silk not more advanced than singles, tram, or organzine and following the principles in United States v. Steinberg Bros. (47 C.C.P.A. 47, C.A.D. 727), the merchandise entered for consumption, or withdrawn from warehouse, prior to June 6,1951, was held dutiable at 20 percent ad valorem under paragraph 1203 of the tariff act, by similitude, and the items entered for consumption, or withdrawn from warehouse, on and after June 6, 1951, were held dutiable at 10 percent under said paragraph 1203, as modified by the Torquay Protocol to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (T.D. 52739), by similitude.

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

Opinion by

Ford, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise is similar in use to thrown silk not more advanced than singles, tram, or organzine and following the principles in United States v. Steinberg Bros. (47 C.C.P.A. 47, C.A.D. 727), the merchandise entered for consumption, or withdrawn from warehouse, prior to June 6,1951, was held dutiable at 20 percent ad valorem under paragraph 1203 of the tariff act, by similitude, and the items entered for consumption, or withdrawn from warehouse, on and after June 6, 1951, were held dutiable at 10 percent under said paragraph 1203, as modified by the Torquay Protocol to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (T.D. 52739), by similitude.

Dato Hosiery Co. v. United States, 46 Cust. Ct. 348 (cusc 1961).

Pincite

46 Cust. Ct. 348 (Dato Hosiery Co. v. United States) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related