Edward P. Paul & Co. v. United States

U.S. Customs Court

Edward P. Paul & Co. v. United States

60 Cust. Ct. 663, 1968 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 2313

CourtUnited States Customs Court

DecidedJune 25, 1968

DocketC.D. 3488

StatusPublished

This text of 60 Cust. Ct. 663 (Edward P. Paul & 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

Edward P. Paul & Co. v. United States, 60 Cust. Ct. 663, 1968 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 2313 (cusc 1968).

Pincite

Opinion

Watson, Judge:

The merchandise at bar, invoiced as grapes in various colors, was classified at the rate of 31% per centum ad valorem under paragraph 1518(a) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as modified by the Presidential proclamation giving effect to certain United States tariff negotiations, T.D. 55615, as artificial or ornamental fruits, wholly or in chief value of “other” materials.

Plaintiff, by amendment in its protest, claimed that the imported merchandise was properly dutiable at the rate of 19 per centum ad valorem under paragraph 233 of the tariff act, as modified, supra, as manufactures in chief value of alabaster, not specially provided for.

The case was submitted and briefs filed by both parties to the controversy. As disclosed by the record in this case, the component ma[664]*664terial of chief value of the imported merchandise has not heen established by competent proof. Plaintiff merely asserts, without any proof, that the importation in question is in chief value of alabaster, wood, or metal. Subsequent to submission, the protest herein was abandoned by counsel for the plaintiff.

In view of the foregoing, the protest in this case is dismissed. Judgment will issue accordingly.

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

Watson, Judge:

The merchandise at bar, invoiced as grapes in various colors, was classified at the rate of 31% per centum ad valorem under paragraph 1518(a) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as modified by the Presidential proclamation giving effect to certain United States tariff negotiations, T.D. 55615, as artificial or ornamental fruits, wholly or in chief value of “other” materials.

Plaintiff, by amendment in its protest, claimed that the imported merchandise was properly dutiable at the rate of 19 per centum ad valorem under paragraph 233 of the tariff act, as modified, supra, as manufactures in chief value of alabaster, not specially provided for.

The case was submitted and briefs filed by both parties to the controversy. As disclosed by the record in this case, the component ma[664]*664terial of chief value of the imported merchandise has not heen established by competent proof. Plaintiff merely asserts, without any proof, that the importation in question is in chief value of alabaster, wood, or metal. Subsequent to submission, the protest herein was abandoned by counsel for the plaintiff.

In view of the foregoing, the protest in this case is dismissed. Judgment will issue accordingly.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

60 Cust. Ct. 663, 1968 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 2313, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/edward-p-paul-co-v-united-states-cusc-1968.