General Sportcraft Co. v. United States

U.S. Customs Court

General Sportcraft Co. v. United States

35 Cust. Ct. 240

CourtUnited States Customs Court

DecidedSeptember 15, 1955

DocketNo. 59277; protest 229336-K (New York)

StatusPublished

This text of 35 Cust. Ct. 240 (General Sportcraft 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

General Sportcraft Co. v. United States, 35 Cust. Ct. 240 (cusc 1955).

Pincite

Opinion

Opinion by

Wilson, J.

In a memorandum to accompany invoice, customs Form 4371, addressed to the collector-from the appraising officer, there appeared the following statement: “These articles being leather sheaths, on reconsideration this office would advisory return under par. 1531 as — manufactures in chief value of leather, at 12)4% ad valorem.” Following the special report of the appraiser, the collector’s office, in a memorandum accompanying the protest, advised that “the merchandise would now be properly classified at 12}4% under paragraph 1531 of the Tariff Act of 1930.” Accordingly, the merchandise, covered by item No. 3022 on the invoice, was held properly dutiable at 12)4 percent under paragraph 1531, as modified by T. D.’s 52373 and 52476, as manufactures of leather.

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

Opinion by

Wilson, J.

In a memorandum to accompany invoice, customs Form 4371, addressed to the collector-from the appraising officer, there appeared the following statement: “These articles being leather sheaths, on reconsideration this office would advisory return under par. 1531 as — manufactures in chief value of leather, at 12)4% ad valorem.” Following the special report of the appraiser, the collector’s office, in a memorandum accompanying the protest, advised that “the merchandise would now be properly classified at 12}4% under paragraph 1531 of the Tariff Act of 1930.” Accordingly, the merchandise, covered by item No. 3022 on the invoice, was held properly dutiable at 12)4 percent under paragraph 1531, as modified by T. D.’s 52373 and 52476, as manufactures of leather.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

35 Cust. Ct. 240, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/general-sportcraft-co-v-united-states-cusc-1955.