Gitkin Co. v. United States

48 Cust. Ct. 572
CourtUnited States Customs Court
DecidedFebruary 27, 1962
DocketReap. Dec. 10181; Entry Nos. 808508-1/2; 808816
StatusPublished

This text of 48 Cust. Ct. 572 (Gitkin 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
Gitkin Co. v. United States, 48 Cust. Ct. 572 (cusc 1962).

Opinion

Mollison, Judge:

Counsel for the parties have submitted the above-enumerated appeals for reappraisement upon stipulation reading as follows:

1. That the merchandise and the issues involved in the appeals for reappraisement enumerated in Schedule “A” hereto attached and made a part hereof are the same in all material respects as those involved in United States v. Gitkin Co., A.R.D. 132, and that the record in the cited case may be incorporated in the record herein.
2. At the time of exportation of the merchandise involved herein, the prices at which such or similar merchandise was freely offered for sale to all purchasers in the principal markets of the country of exportation, in the usual wholesale quantities and in the ordinary course of trade, for exportation to the United States, including the cost of all containers and coverings of whatever nature and all other costs, charges and expenses incidental to placing the merchandise [573]*573in condition, packed ready for shipment to the United States, were the appraised values, less the amounts indicated on the entry papers as having been added back on entry to make market value; and that at the said time of exportation, such or similar merchandise was not freely offered for sale to all purchasers for home consumption in the country of exportation.

On the agreed facts, I find export value, as defined in section 402(d), Tariff Act of 1930, as it existed prior to the effective date of the amendment thereof by the Customs Simplification Act of 1956, to be the proper basis for the determination of the values of the merchandise involved and that such values were the appraised values, less the amounts indicated on the entry papers as having been added back on . entry to make market value.

Judgment will issue accordingly.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
48 Cust. Ct. 572, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gitkin-co-v-united-states-cusc-1962.