Kildall Co. v. United States

U.S. Customs Court

Kildall Co. v. United States

28 Cust. Ct. 392, 1952 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 202

CourtUnited States Customs Court

DecidedFebruary 6, 1952

DocketNo. 56362; petition 6831-R (Minneapolis)

StatusPublished

This text of 28 Cust. Ct. 392 (Kildall 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

Kildall Co. v. United States, 28 Cust. Ct. 392, 1952 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 202 (cusc 1952).

Pincite

Opinion

Opinion by

Ford, J.

From the testimony it appeared that the secretary-treasurer of petitioner discussed the entry of the merchandise with the appraiser at Minneapolis; that the merchandise was appraised at the value at which it was offered for sale in usual wholesale quantities to all purchasers in the United States; and that since the petitioner did not agree to that value, it decided to set up this case as a test case. Upon the record presented it was hold that there was no intention to defraud the revenue of the United States or to conceal or misrepresent the facts of the case or to deceive the appraiser as to the value of the merchandise. The petition was therefore granted.

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

Opinion by

Ford, J.

From the testimony it appeared that the secretary-treasurer of petitioner discussed the entry of the merchandise with the appraiser at Minneapolis; that the merchandise was appraised at the value at which it was offered for sale in usual wholesale quantities to all purchasers in the United States; and that since the petitioner did not agree to that value, it decided to set up this case as a test case. Upon the record presented it was hold that there was no intention to defraud the revenue of the United States or to conceal or misrepresent the facts of the case or to deceive the appraiser as to the value of the merchandise. The petition was therefore granted.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

28 Cust. Ct. 392, 1952 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 202, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kildall-co-v-united-states-cusc-1952.