Khosrovschahi v. United States

24 Cust. Ct. 469, 1950 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 1972
CourtUnited States Customs Court
DecidedMay 23, 1950
DocketNo. 54347; protests 144655-K (A) and 144655-K (B) (New York)
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 24 Cust. Ct. 469 (Khosrovschahi 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
Khosrovschahi v. United States, 24 Cust. Ct. 469, 1950 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 1972 (cusc 1950).

Opinion

Ekwall, Judge:

Two protests are involved here directed against the imposition of duty upon merchandise covered by the same entries. The commodity imported consisted of washed camel’s hair carpet wool imported from Iran. At the trial of the case counsel for the Government moved to dismiss protest No. .144655-K (A) as premature under section 514 of the Tariff Act of 1930. Ruling on the motion was reserved. In his brief counsel for the plaintiff states that inasmuch as the issue is the same in each protest, no objection is made to the motion to dismiss said protest. The motion is therefore granted.

As to protest No. 144655-K (B), the merchandise was entered under paragraph 1101 (a) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U. S. C. § 1001, par. 1101 (a)). The paragraph in question provides free entry under bond for such wool, conditioned ppon its use in the manufacture of articles such as carpets, etc., enumerated in the paragraph; if not so used, the duties provided in the paragraph would be payable, together with certain penalties.

The letter of transmittal, forwarded to the court by the collector, relates all of the facts, which are not disputed. We quote the same as follows:

This protest is lodged against the Collector’s action in liquidating for duty certain Camels Hair Wool that was imported to be used in the manufacture of 'floor coverings and other articles. Entries were made on customs Form 7501 Free Consumption Entry under a Wool Bond.
In this instance the importer’s general term bond was used. .No duty or estimated deposit of duty was taken at time 'of entry because of the importer’s intention to use the merchandise in the manufacture of certain specified articles. The merchandise was delivered to the importer without the payment of estimated ■duties because of his ■ posting ■ of the carpet wool bond.- The merchandise was taken out of customs custody by reason of this delivery and was kept by and for the account of the importer in some storage place but not in a U. S. Customs ■bonded warehouse.
After a certain lapse of time, the importer did export the merchandise herein, but it was not done under Customs Supervision.
The terms and conditions of the bond not having been complied with, the Collector at New York, under the date of July 25, 1946, wrote to the Bureau of Customs for instructions relative to the assessment of duty and also penalty on the bond. Under date of September 3, 1946, the Bureau replied, advising the Collector to proceed with a demand for liquidated damages for failure to comply with the terms of the bond and duties should be assessed on the merchandise in .accordance with See. 10.91 (a) of Customs Regulations 1943.
Under date of September 17, 1946, the importer was notified that, as he had not complied with the terms of his bond, full duty and .the penalty under the bond had now become due and the duty and penalty were demanded from the importer Importer was notified also that under Sec. 623 of the Act he could [470]*470file a petition for relief under the penalty for failure to comply with the terms of the bond.
Under date of November 4, 1946, the importer did request the Bureau to grant relief from liquidated damages under his term bond, and also asked for relief from the payment of duty on the merchandise.
Under date of March 21, 1947, the Bureau granted the importer’s petition for remission of the penalty on his bond, but refused to grant any relief from the payment of duties, stating the Bureau was not authorized to grant any relief from duty because of importer’s failure to comply with the terms of the bond and the Customs Regulations of 1943.

Paragraph 1101, supra (as amended by sec. 33 (a), Customs Administrative Act of 1938), is in the following language:

(a) Wools: Donskoi, Smyrna, Cordova, * * *; and hair of the camel; all the foregoing, in the grease or washed, 24 cents per pound of clean content; * * * Provided, That a tolerance of not more than 10 per centum of wools not finer than 44s may be allowed in each bale or package of wools imported as not finer than 40s.
(b) Any of the foregoing [wool and hair of the camel] may be entered or withdrawn from warehouse without the payment of duty by a manufacturer, processor, or dealer upon the filing of a bond to insure that any wool or hair entered or withdrawn thereunder shall be used only in the manufacture of press cloth, camel’s hair belting, knit or felt boots, heavy fulled lumbermen’s socks, rugs, carpets, or any other floor coverings. A manufacturer, processor, or dealer may be relieved of liability under his bond with respect to any wool or hair so entered or withdrawn which is transferred in its imported or any other form to another manufacturer, processor, or dealer who has filed a bond to insure that the merchandise so transferred shall be used only in the manufacture of the above-enumerated articles. If any wool or hair so entered, withdrawn, or transferred under bond is used or transferred for use in its imported or any other form in any manner otherwise than in the manufacture of the articles enumerated above, there shall be levied, collected, and paid on the merchandise so used or transferred in violation of the bond the regular duties which would apply to such merchandise if imported in its condition at the time of such use or transfer. Such duties shall be paid by the manufacturer, processor, or dealer whose bond is charged with the wool or hair at the time of such use or transfer; but such duties shall not be levied or collected on any merchandise (except white soft wastes, white threads and noils, which shall be dutiable at seven-eighths of such regular duties when used or transferred for use otherwise than in the manufacture of the enumerated articles) resulting in the usual course of manufacture of such enumerated manufactured articles which cannot be used (with or without further preparation) in the usual course of the manufacture of such enumerated articles, or which is exported or destroyed. When any wool or hair which has been entered or withdrawn under bond as provided for in this subparagraph is used or transferred for use, in its imported or any other form, otherwise than in the manufacture of the above-enumerated articles and prior to such use or transfer there shall have been combined or mixed with such wool or hair any other merchandise, the whole or the combination or mixture shall be presumed to be composed of wool or hair entered or withdrawn under bond, as provided for in this subparagraph, unless the manufacturer, processor, or dealer liable for the payment of the duties shall establish the quantity of bonded wool or hair in such combination or mixture.

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

Related

Khosrovschahi v. United States
39 C.C.P.A. 40 (Customs and Patent Appeals, 1951)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
24 Cust. Ct. 469, 1950 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 1972, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/khosrovschahi-v-united-states-cusc-1950.