Holt v. United States

U.S. Customs Court

Holt v. United States

25 Cust. Ct. 217, 1950 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 47

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Holt v. United States. Read the opinion of the Court — 23 Cust. Ct. 243 →

United States Customs Court·Decided June 20, 1950·No. No. 54422; petitions 6766-R and 6767-R (Tampa)·Published

Opinion

Opinion by

Rao, J.

Counsel for the petitioner advised the court that petition 6766-R was filed on August 31, 1949, at which time there was pending a motion for rehearing of a decision rendered July 11, 1949, upon petitioner’s appeal for reappraisement. The decision on said motion was not rendered until September 21, 1949, and consequently, until that last-mentioned date, there was no final appraisement. Petition 6766-R, filed prior thereto, was therefore dismissed as premature. With respect to petition 6767-R, it appeared that there was an honest difference of opinion between the importer and the appraiser as to the [218]*218proper basis for determining value. Upon a full consideration of the entire record it was held that there was no intent to defraud the revenue of the United States or to deceive the appraiser as to the value of the merchandise or to conceal or misrepresent the facts of the case. Petition 6767-R was therefore granted.

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

Opinion by

Rao, J.

Counsel for the petitioner advised the court that petition 6766-R was filed on August 31, 1949, at which time there was pending a motion for rehearing of a decision rendered July 11, 1949, upon petitioner’s appeal for reappraisement. The decision on said motion was not rendered until September 21, 1949, and consequently, until that last-mentioned date, there was no final appraisement. Petition 6766-R, filed prior thereto, was therefore dismissed as premature. With respect to petition 6767-R, it appeared that there was an honest difference of opinion between the importer and the appraiser as to the [218]*218proper basis for determining value. Upon a full consideration of the entire record it was held that there was no intent to defraud the revenue of the United States or to deceive the appraiser as to the value of the merchandise or to conceal or misrepresent the facts of the case. Petition 6767-R was therefore granted.

Holt v. United States, 25 Cust. Ct. 217, 1950 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 47 (cusc 1950).

Pincite

25 Cust. Ct. 217 (Holt v. United States) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.